Re: [spoon-discuss] Ow.

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 01:56  PM, Glotmorf wrote:

> On 6/30/03 at 12:58 PM Daniel Lepage wrote:
>
> > Curiously enough, if you had put another rule in your fake prop, it
> > would have been legal under the multiple rules clause. But if it's a
> > single rule, you have to have the same name on the prop and the rule.
> > Kinda funny how that works.
>
> Sorry, guy, it doesn't quite say that.  It says that "The Proposal is 
> given the same title as the Rule."  That doesn't mean it has to start 
> out that way.  It means if it's recognized as to "propose a rule" its 
> title needs to be changed to that of the rule inside.  But the 
> original, overwritten title doesn't make the proposal illegal.

Hmm... I suppose you're right. But the original point still stands - 
you have said nothing in any public forum to indicate that your intent 
was for the block of text you sent to be a proposal at all, much less a 
r216 "proposed rule".

--
Wonko

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