DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Sat, 2022-12-10 at 22:24 -0800, omd via agora-business wrote: > Did I break the lists again? This message got through to me, so hopefully not. -- ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: test post pls ignore

received, if that helps. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 9:23 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > bloop > > > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Test

what is it supposed to say? On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:34 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ > /\ ___\ /\ \_\ \ /\ \ /\ "-.\ \ /\ \ /\ ___\ /\ ___\ > \ \___ \ \ \ __ \ \ \ \ \ \ \-. \ \ \ \ \ \ __\

DIS: Re: BUS: Test

This is perfectly understandable to me and I plan to assign it in the usual cycle. If someone thinks it *isn't* a CFJ, please CFJ on whether V.J. Rada just created a CFJ. Which is probably advisable, because when I enter this into the database I'm going to enter it in the usual font and the

DIS: Re: BUS: Test

(this may be a cfj) On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 6:34 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ > /\ ___\ /\ \_\ \ /\ \ /\ "-.\ \ /\ \ /\ ___\ /\ ___\ > \ \___ \ \ \ __ \ \ \ \ \ \ \-. \ \ \ \ \ \ __\ \ \___

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Test of Confidence

On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote: But if you're really that incensed by me playing the game, I'm happy to take my ball and go home. Just say the word. That gave me a vision of "what if deregistrations were as easily triggered as registrations". Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Test of Confidence

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:45 AM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > I'm sorry. I'm in rather a bad mood today, but that's no excuse. I was > far too harsh in my message, and I apologise to you and anyone else > I've been rude to. > > I do disapprove of blanket votes

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Test of Confidence

I'm sorry. I'm in rather a bad mood today, but that's no excuse. I was far too harsh in my message, and I apologise to you and anyone else I've been rude to. I do disapprove of blanket votes for the reasons I discussed, but there was no reason for me to be rude about it. Again, I'm very sorry for

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Test of Confidence

Dunno where you got that idea. I like scams and funny business, I just was particularly annoyed by "funny business" that was clearly impossible. This is clearly an action I'm allowed to take, regardless of whether you want to shame me out of my civic duty or not. Also "arbitrary" in this case is

DIS: Re: BUS: Test of Confidence

Really? Can people cut it out with the arbitrary voting? Agora is supposed to a legislative nomic, which as I understand it is why everyone is here. The idea of the nomic is that we discuss and think about ideas, constantly striving for improvement. I'm used to CuddleBeam pulling this kind of

DIS: Re: BUS: test

2009/8/9 Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu: test I abject.

DIS: Re: BUS: test

2009/8/10 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com: On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote: test I object. You can tell it's a dependent action because he cunningly didn't put anything in the raw email.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Elliott Hirdpenguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: 2009/8/10 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com: On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote: test I object. You can tell it's a dependent action because he cunningly didn't put

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

2009/8/10 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com: It could be a contract-defined dependent action. I'm fairly sure the courts disagree.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

Elliott Hird wrote: 2009/8/10 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com: It could be a contract-defined dependent action. I'm fairly sure the courts disagree. Funnily enough, the as if it were a rule clause helps here; a rule must be explicit in the definition of a dependent action.

DIS: Re: BUS: Test test test

Delivered-To: penguinoftheg...@gmail.com Received: by 10.181.134.15 with SMTP id l15cs70502bkn; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:01:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.143.14 with SMTP id q14mr2135590and.47.1234310468784; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:01:08 -0800 (PST) Return-Path:

DIS: Re: BUS: Test test test

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Warrigal ihope12...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 6:48 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote: Test, test, test, test, test, test. I support. Sorry, that's the last test. Cron's been acting up.

DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Saturday 20 September 2008 10:21:09 pm Ben Caplan wrote: This is a test message. Check the headers.

DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Ben Caplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a test message. We have precedent that the content of the Subject header has no bearing on the effect of the message. I doubt that the X-Agora-Game-Action header would either. -root

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Tuesday 23 September 2008 06:21:38 pm Ian Kelly wrote: On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Ben Caplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a test message. We have precedent that the content of the Subject header has no bearing on the effect of the message. I doubt that the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

2008/9/24 Ben Caplan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: But the name of the header explicitly labels the accompanying text as an Agora game action. Precedent is that only message bodies are in-game.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

Pavitra wrote: On Saturday 20 September 2008 10:21:09 pm Ben Caplan wrote: This is a test message. Check the headers. Already deleted the message. What did it attempt?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: test

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pavitra wrote: On Saturday 20 September 2008 10:21:09 pm Ben Caplan wrote: This is a test message. Check the headers. Already deleted the message. What did it attempt? I CFJ on this statement. -root

DIS: Re: BUS: Test message

On Jun 13, 2008, at 6:54 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a test message, nothing to see here. Just in case, I object. -root That's nice. What are you objecting to? Seriously, though... I had had delivery problems