Re: [s-d] @0x44

0x44 on Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:32:49 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] @0x44

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] @0x44
From: 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:32:49 -0600
In-reply-to: <8873BAE1-AC62-4A4A-9976-F68022D13F2E@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <8873BAE1-AC62-4A4A-9976-F68022D13F2E@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105)

Elliott Hird wrote:

what is up with the numbering spam? If it's meant to be a ballot youhave to publish it in one go.

If you look back on the archive, you'll notice that historically the MoCannounced what number a proposal was.


--
--
0x44;

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] @0x44
  - From: Elliott Hird

References:
- [s-d] @0x44
  - From: Elliott Hird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Electioneering.
Previous by thread: [s-d] @0x44
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] @0x44
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread