Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "

Elliott Hird on Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:27:11 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "error-free" ruleset

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "error-free" ruleset
From: Elliott Hird <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:27:02 +0000
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:mime-version:in-reply-to :references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :subject:date:to:x-mailer:from; bh=pb69pFWT3V2vQL+OiAxm2JfdYE2CY9lP30SiLsnL+W4=; b=E3Y5Bkx9eew0oEblbCZI/l2QIut5gYt1XvbJeClXvneZ1iY+Elwg0ZvJZHzrYPjMQG YGIl8TVbM8QaL98tReWmBQzPJ0mNR9CqAxdzkEUnQ+D+pZKwpu5pdc+eni5M7Hqbl1ch laMBoKIego5dPFE4LzntFZ5zk7sYDneGGgGvE=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id :content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:to:x-mailer:from; b=LAJRbhM+/+wTNt4CmRpGu6/CGBS88C9NvddK2WJHblC1MzNG2dtCEYMj4nI99nfEVx vKjwFmFFJ5P48ap7zlW5iuFZlqFx7Ki9AhuBFDJnP0DOylku8I6qClL6SQalMrNsZk6o rmhjCwQdEFJzv1y0xaoGWN7PLEoxLga7776tg=
In-reply-to: <285c99840812221451s3f0e3b04ueae660352f1a0804@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <285c99840812221138j2fab199bhe6a78ee16dfa3097@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <144940E0-053A-4A2F-A9D8-6BD7786DBC0B@xxxxxxxxx> <285c99840812221451s3f0e3b04ueae660352f1a0804@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


On 22 Dec 2008, at 22:51, Charles Schaefer wrote:

Mistaken, actually. You're right, I overlooked 5E46 (right where itshould
be, nitpicking and definitions).

:)

Further evidence supporting my argument in favor of the dice server.


I disagree -- it's not a random number from the dice server meeting the
specifications.

Do you have anything to say about my other two criticisms of yourruleset?


Are they criticisms of the ruleset? I don't see that. BTW, it's not like
making it perfect first time was possible.

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

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "error-free" ruleset
  - From: Elliott Hird
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "error-free" ruleset
  - From: Charles Schaefer

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] OK Charles
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Ministerial Elections for nweek/152 RESULTS
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Not one, but TWO consultations regarding our wonderful "error-free" ruleset
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] OK Charles
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread