Re: [s-b] [s-d] Concerning the AFO.

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

I am afraid that, as is the case with the prior consultation submitted by
the AFO, I am unsure as to whether it is valid. I will await the settlement
and ponderation of Consultation 39 to assign a number and priest to this
consultation.

Billy Pilgrim

On Nov 22, 2007 10:00 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> pikhq wrote:
>
> > It seems that in agora-discussion, I had one person support me joining
> the
> > AFO, and two people with conditional support for the same. . . The
> conditions
> > have been met, so I am a member of the AFO.
>
> This is correct; I missed that comex had supported it (it was worded as
> "I support the triply-quoted intent" and appeared in the midst of some
> other stuff not related to the AFO).
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business