Re: [s-b] [s-d] If you want time shenanigans, you shall have them

[Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

1-11 lists within its text the relevant history, but not what that means
the present gamestate is. This is an oversight on my part, and I hereby
resubmit the proposal, its text unaltered, noting this time that it does
not change the gamestate at all except in so far as current publications of
the ruleset are incorrect.

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 3:41 PM 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Proposal 1-11 is itself a statement of relevant resulting temporal changes
> whilst Proposal 1-7 is not.
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > Per Rule 3-8, I nullify the submission of Proposal 1-11 as it does not
> > include the statement of relevant resulting changes from changing the
> rules
> > from the beginning of the Eighth Era.
> >
> > [[Obviously, this only has any meaning if Proposal 1-11 passed. Or will
> > pass. Or passed in a different time reference frame. Or something. I
> > think.]]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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