[s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight

Mark Walsh on Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:03:32 -0600 (CST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight

To: "spoon-discuss" <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight
From: "Mark Walsh" <flutesultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 09:02:50 -0800
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=bDqZM4rlGUh4bcYpnTpwP02X0kDM+ZGIrcmzO+dFPuCoMd1oINSaCXl4FWkdkzHs; h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;

In my current Prop correcting some House problems,
I'm guilty of a potentially serious oversight.
I failed to place Aunt Mabel's Soul in the Attic!
comex has adeptly arranged eir Skills to pass the
Attic entry requirements, and appears poised to
go there.

Is a Referendum correcting this oversight advisable
(or even legal)?

Triller

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight
  - From: comex
- [s-d] Re: A (possibly) Serious Oversight
  - From: Peter Cooper Jr.

Prev by Date: [s-d] An oddity surfaces.
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight
Previous by thread: [s-d] Re: An oddity surfaces.
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] A (possibly) Serious Oversight
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread