Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 44 BALLOT

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 01:08  PM, SkArcher wrote:

> 30/06/2003 17:59:06, Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > > Proposal 1574/0: Duties (SkArcher)
> > Yes, but I hope to get rid of the clause requiring all Duties to be in
> > that rule. That's what keywords are for.
>
> I did send a reply about this, but I think it got chewed up by my 
> server
>
> The wording of the rule only requires the duties to be listed there - 
> it does not say that the duties must have their entire clauses and 
> effects there, just
> that a list of them must be kept there. The only reason the Duty Duty 
> is fully explained is that - well, where else is it going to go?
>
> I am aware that keywords are theoretically for this, but frankly i 
> find that the keywords system isn't greatly implemented and some rules 
> are missing
> essential keywords

We have a Ministry of Keywords for this, which I intend to run for as 
soon as I return from vacation (leaving tomorrow, back on saturday). I 
haven't done much with keywords yet because I don't want to bother with 
rules that are about to be repealed anyway.; I'm waiting to see what's 
left, and I'll be happy to rekey all the survivors.

--
Wonko

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