Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence

Ed Murphy on Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:05:07 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
From: Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:02:21 -0800
In-reply-to: <E6460DCB-D4C7-42E7-AD56-5D604EB3764B@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <4974DF75.3030805@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <E6460DCB-D4C7-42E7-AD56-5D604EB3764B@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081209 Thunderbird/2.0.0.19 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0

ehird wrote:

> On 19 Jan 2009, at 20:15, Ed Murphy wrote:
> 
>> Proposal:  Two-tier precedence
> 
> Man, you have awful Agora withdrawal.

You can hardly blame Agora for concepts that are explicitly stated in
Suber's initial ruleset.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
  - From: Elliott Hird

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
  - From: Elliott Hird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] jahsd
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread