Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization

ihope on Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:33:13 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization

To: spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
From: ihope <ihope127@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:33:09 -0500
In-reply-to: <56732cfd0802070823k5d5f845eq7839c5065e8213cd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <169695.7652.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6d741b990802051645r5e03a7cfw84e86bdd8e39c077@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650802051746m4e5c5c1dje82e3b7a4f5e8a6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <47A919F9.4070000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <88C6101A-B132-4DA3-8AA7-74AC83E5F0F6@xxxxxxxxx> <56732cfd0802061006x7742b5b5t531335b8644a37ca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6d741b990802061019x66b5d60g8e03b5c53af185eb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <56732cfd0802061450r5dc73ee5l199c31344b0865b6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650802062129m152bf5b2q7198a7da138d0e09@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <56732cfd0802070823k5d5f845eq7839c5065e8213cd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On 07/02/2008, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is Consultation #105. I assign it to Priest Ivan Hope.
>
> NOTE: This consultation can only be found to be YES. If it is found to
> be NO, then it would not be a consultation, since both the message
> that called it and this message include the text of the quasi-proposal
> "Enough Already!".
>
> Oracle BobTHJ

I answer this consultation NO, with the Oracularity of "All proposals
with the title of Enough Already! as well as all Consultations
numbered 105 are destroyed." If this Consultation didn't exist,
wonderful; if it did exist, now it doesn't.

--Ivan Hope CXXVII
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Geoffrey Spear
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: ihope
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Roger Hicks
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Mike McGann

References:
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Roger Hicks
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Roger Hicks
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Jamie Dallaire
- Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
  - From: Roger Hicks

Prev by Date: Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
Next by Date: Re: [s-b] Blueprint Creation
Previous by thread: Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
Next by thread: Re: [s-b] [s-d] Rule Categorization
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread