Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation

Antonio Dolcetta on Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:35:48 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation

To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation
From: Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:38:21 +0200
In-reply-to: <33dd05c30707270913k62750a03g9dccb744a0809502@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <33dd05c30707270913k62750a03g9dccb744a0809502@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509)

Aaron Coquet wrote:

> Reasoning: We have factions, and rules governing factions, but don't
> seem to have any way to  allow a Faction to have their own rules.
> 

yes we do, factions are agreements, and agreements are allowed to define 
their own internal rules

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

Prev by Date: [s-d] Faction anyone ?
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] spoon-business Digest, Vol 43, Issue 20
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations 23, 24 (was: Consultation)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread