Re: [s-b] C Nomic

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

Thank you very much. I guess you're right about the current proposals on C.
I do think that 493 and 494 become redundant if they pass and the
oracularity is then pondered, though.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Charles Schaefer
<chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  I claim Billy Pilgrim's answer to Consultation 131 as CONSISTENT, and as
> Da
> Boss, cause VFS to transfer him m75 for a very well written reasoning and
> oracularity, which I believe do not invalidate the intent of any of the
> current proposals involving C Nomic.
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business