Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset

comex on Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:13:08 +0200 (CEST)

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

Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
From: comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 20:12:48 -0400
In-reply-to: <44e5a2650708091649g76456aech9780109af2b0fccf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <cf0c2a990708080806p1e7262e1pe4cfd5e83897d829@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <07F236BF-66C7-44BB-BCE2-0078006584F1@xxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650708091649g76456aech9780109af2b0fccf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.9.7

On Thursday 09 August 2007, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> Or, alternatively, I guess the easiest way, and I don't think anyone
> would object, would be to de-spivakify any rules passed this nweek via a
> Tidiness List during the next nweek, if this proposal on
> de-spivakification (say that three times fast) passes.
How do you know that the proposal will *pass*?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
  - From: Geoffrey Spear
- Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
  - From: Antonio Dolcetta
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] Proposal: de-Spivakify Ruleset
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread