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

["Roger Hicks" <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Feb 7, 2008 9:23 AM, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2008 10:29 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 2008 5:50 PM, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Blame it on Murphy. I just plagiarized the thing. I revise the
> > > proposal titled "Enough Already!" to read:
> > > {
> > > Repeal all rules except for 4E0 through 4E40 and 4E42 through 4E100
> > > }
> >
> >
> > I submit the following consultation:
> >
> > Question: At the time of this consultation's submission, does there exist a
> > Proposal titled "Enough Already!"?
> >
> > Reasoning: I can't say, but you should know what I mean. wink wink.
> > Oracularity, please.
> >
>
> 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!".
>

This consultation was declared inconsistent. I re-assign it (if it
exists) to Priest 0x44.

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