Re: [s-b] Consultation 202 on Early motnw Change

[teucer@xxxxxxxxx]

Consistent.

On 1/25/09, Justin Ahmann <quesmarktion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I answer this Consultation (204, submitted by Wooble) YES.  I defer to the
> Supplicant's Reasoning, which is, IMHO,
>
> {
> Question:
>
> ARGUMENTS: Rule 5E36 defines thusly: Reasoning, meaning text that
> clarifies the intent of the Consultation.
>
> Unbeliever:
> }
>
> Codae
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 9:49:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [s-b] Consultation 202 on Early motnw Change
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Tyler <wisety@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Oh, and please call your arguments "Reasoning" or I might not archive it.
>> (Being under no obligation.)
>
> I submit the following Consultation:
> {{
> Question: Is text included with a Consultation that clarifies the
> intent of the Consultation Reasoning, even if it's not labeled as
> such?
>
> ARGUMENTS: Rule 5E36 defines thusly: Reasoning, meaning text that
> clarifies the intent of the Consultation.
>
> Unbeliever: Tyler
> }}
>
> --
> Wooble
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business