Sean Hunt on Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:53:44 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-b] [s-d] The current gamestates, as I understand them |
no I'm confused enough that I'm considering writing an alternate and slightly more sensible initial set of rules before advertising the start of the nomic elsewhere and then proclaiming a start. On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 17:32, Paul VanKoughnett <allispaul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've been lurking on this list for a while, and will probably actually > join the game since you've started a new one. But for now I'm just > dropping in to say: in what way did the proposals state an explicit > intention to modify only that document? Presumably, they (implicitly) > intended to modify two documents -- the two extant rulesets -- and one > of those intentions automatically failed. > > --Paul > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Eric Stucky <turiski.nomic@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Haha, I think I like the new proposal more than "re-move law 4". Yes. > > > > > No outstanding proposals, since quotation marks aren't curly brackets. > > Yeah, and while law 9 doesn't make it illegal, it probably makes it > pretty useless. > > > > [ -Turiski ] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > spoon-business mailing list > > spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business > _______________________________________________ > 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