DIS: Re: BUS: that reminds me

2013-08-17 Thread Tanner Swett
Arguments on whatever CFJs: In this case, I think it's reasonably clear that this message's purported author is Sam. It's also reasonably clear that Sam is purported to be a different person from Walker. If we decide it's ambiguous whether the purported author is Walker or Sam-not-Walker,

DIS: Re: BUS: You've got red on you.

2013-08-17 Thread Tanner Swett
On Aug 15, 2013, at 1:33 PM, Joe Stefek wrote: I revoke the promise entitled Moar Zombies!. You can only revoke promises With Notice. —Machiavelli

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: You've got red on you.

2013-08-17 Thread Joe Stefek
Ahh, I missed that bit when reading, I shall do so. Thanks. --aperfectring On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote: On Aug 15, 2013, at 1:33 PM, Joe Stefek wrote: I revoke the promise entitled Moar Zombies!. You can only revoke promises With Notice.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3383a assigned to Wooble, woggle and Walker

2013-08-17 Thread Tanner Swett
Brief further arguments: I think GUILTY is wholly inappropriate on 3383, as Fool had no way of knowing eir actions would be considered to violate Rule 101. At most, it would be appropriate to declare his actions illegal and then judge NOT GUILTY. —Machiavelli

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3383a assigned to Wooble, woggle and Walker

2013-08-17 Thread Charles Walker
On 17 Aug 2013 19:37, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote: Brief further arguments: I think GUILTY is wholly inappropriate on 3383, as Fool had no way of knowing eir actions would be considered to violate Rule 101. At most, it would be appropriate to declare his actions illegal and then

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Horton] Promise Report

2013-08-17 Thread woggle
On 8/15/13 14:49 , Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sat, 10 Aug 2013, woggle wrote: HORTON'S WEEKLY REPORT Date of this report: 2013-08-10 Date of last report: 2013-08-03 ### Quantity: 1 (disputed; under CFJ) Text: As