On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Geoffrey Speargeoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
I spend a Distrib-u-Matic card to make Fix Veto distributable.
I believe I had an outstanding intent to make this distributable
without objection which was not objected to. I really should mark
these things because I seem
I intend, without /three/ objections, to make this proposal
distributable.
Umm, how?
2009/6/16 Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 12:39 +0100, Alex Smith wrote:
I submit the following proposal (II=3, Title=A Terrible Proposal):
Create a rule with the following text:
{{{
Any set of persons who between them have at least 10 instances of the
patent
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn
jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote:
Is this even possible? Does the permitted in the sentence if no
other player is permitted to distribute a proposal, anyone can without
three objections mean can or may?
It means MAY, but combined with A player
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Aaron Goldfeinaarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
I used II=2 because I thought it would be a controversial change.
Controversy != complexity.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Geoffrey Speargeoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
I spend D# D# D# to flip the Distributability of the Proposal entitled
No More Distributability to Undistributable.
II-2 is unreasonable for a proposal that replaces a rule with the
exact text it had very recently.
6 matches
Mail list logo
