Oh it was rejected. Never mind!
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 8:26 PM Rebecca wrote:
> Hey guys, see that "IAR writs repeal proposal, which I think passed? Why is
> that still in the ruleset?
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 7:28 AM Edward Murphy wrote:
>
> > > 8058* V.J. Rada 1.0 Medal of Honour Au
Hey guys, see that "IAR writs repeal proposal, which I think passed? Why is
that still in the ruleset?
On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 7:28 AM Edward Murphy wrote:
> > 8058* V.J. Rada 1.0 Medal of Honour Auctions V.J. Rada
> AGAINST
> > 8059* G. 1.0 honour is its own reward
I retract my previous vote, and vote as follows, on behalf of myself
and my zombie,
> 8058* V.J. Rada 1.0 Medal of Honour Auctions V.J. Rafa
AGAINST
> 8059* G. 1.0 honour is its own reward G.
FOR
> 8060* V.J. Rada 1.8 Notary-B-Gone
NTTPF.
~Corona
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:48 PM ATMunn wrote:
>
> > I vote as follows:
> >
> > > 8058* V.J. Rada 1.0 Medal of Honour Auctions V.J. Rada
> > PRESENT. The original intent of
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:48 PM ATMunn wrote:
> I vote as follows:
>
> > 8058* V.J. Rada 1.0 Medal of Honour Auctions V.J. Rada
> PRESENT. The original intent of Medals of Honour would be for the person
> deemed most honorable to get them, not whoever is the richest.
> > 8059* G.
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> >>If P8062 is REJECTED, FOR; otherwise AGAINST.
>
> These conditionals do not work because these are evaluated at the end of
> the voting period, which is before the resolution of proposals.
Some language used in the past was "If the outcome of this would
6 matches
Mail list logo
