Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187

Charles Schaefer on Thu, 1 Jan 2009 18:18:07 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187

To: "discussion list for B Nomic" <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
From: "Charles Schaefer" <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 17:17:10 -0800
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=2/9iRtXHt89CHg1cUNOc9aCcSYP3pAC5frkEwCV0A54=; b=xVtURumAVCHNTFtueNInrNZWJN/AthosZdwTYfWWA4iEXjvWGx7pmM7uJdbMEpMV0h Q8bgDsOg79tzwapnaTMt9ZoETEPp4So82Wl6AGtNCHHpXEFlXje8vmD8jueJjXyh8G2Q RnOi6lFavoI6GQrzrH6jUsbdx0r8cj/kGygXo=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=xEExOljq74mXkFSPEKyNODd113iWGBM8s6Zz/p8pzDaXKahW8x7OWeVRLkyioGtDT0 DUD5SQTDqfa12jS+DcVKbPPP7QsJnz1pXOA2a7dxrFSnNAi0BR7S0BtDRTsPOTk1hZCp Bi+vxODWij6HnWcXfR71mWXTHkf7NYx/l+wGI=
In-reply-to: <7C64CA89-403A-4825-BE45-E73A6BC6E352@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <7db5cba20812311526y2983f8a8i69bff80bca335064@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <285c99840812311609i557c3f34tc2acaf732884cfa5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7db5cba20901011158y6d1edadblc40d04c6944af635@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650901011201s786e73e8xebe984b9e26d5ca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <903D8FDE-8C20-42A5-BEDA-D1FD03740A74@xxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650901011205l177f78e7pe47a01373478e29a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7C64CA89-403A-4825-BE45-E73A6BC6E352@xxxxxxxxx>

2009/1/1, Elliott Hird <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>
> On 1 Jan 2009, at 20:05, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
>
> A tie just results in Ponderation, not game breakage.
>>
>
> Ponderation is what I'm trying to avoid ... it's blatantly incorrect.

BLATANTLY incorrect? If it were blatant, there would be no consultation on
it in the first place. And consistent and inconsistent claims would not be
so close. I may be incorrect, but not blatantly so.

> --
> w1n5t0n aka
> Charles Schaefer
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
  - From: Elliott Hird

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
  - From: Elliott Hird
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
  - From: Jamie Dallaire
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
  - From: Elliott Hird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread