Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)

bnomic on Mon, 2 Feb 2009 10:24:07 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)

To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)
From: <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:24:03 +0000
In-reply-to: <44e5a2650902020920u4160e492m9b8537f0b5448448@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <349823.2095.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650902020920v274df9fbs405becbf840a3831@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650902020920u4160e492m9b8537f0b5448448@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: RoundCube Webmail

On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:20:44 -0500, Jamie Dallaire
<bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> CONSISTENT.
> 
> why wouldn't we allow "I find" when we keep allowing messages like the
> above??

I am not convinced that the above works, but Rule 5e10 prevents us from
recalculating all the results of all Consultations that erroneously treated
such "claims" as valid.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 196 on ehird and the time rip
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 196 on ehird and the time rip
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread