Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Priestly Indecision

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wrong forum?

--  
Wonko

On Aug 11, 2007, at 6:06 PM, Charles Schaefer wrote:

> I amend my proposal to read:
> Add the following text to Rule 2-5:
> "After a Priest answers a consultation assigned to them, but before it
> becomes pondered, they may change their ruling on that consultation  
> if they
> have not already done so. Doing
> this causes all claims regarding its consistency to be erased and  
> the four
> nday waiting period before it becomes pondered to start over."
>
> 2007/8/11, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> On 8/11/07, Charles Schaefer <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Add the following text to Rule 2-5:
>>> "After a Priest answers a consultation assigned to them, but  
>>> before it
>>> becomes pondered, they may change their ruling on that consultation.
>> Doing
>>> this causes all claims regarding its consistency to be erased and  
>>> the
>> four
>>> nday waiting period before it becomes pondered to start over."
>>
>> I like it, with the exception that it allows a priest to keep a
>> consultation in a pending state forever.
>>
>> BobTHJ
>> _______________________________________________
>> spoon-discuss mailing list
>> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

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