Re: [s-d] List of factions

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Consultation 39 is indeed pondered and the AFO can submit a consultation.
I'm about to go assign priests for the two submitted by AFO. That said, I'm
not sure what the consequences of the consultation are for AFO's playerhood,
honestly. The answer to the Consultation directly establishes that the AFO
is allowed to submit consultations. The reasoning of the Priest establishes
that the AFO is a player, but I'm not sure if the reasoning itself has the
same legal force as the answer. I think it does establish AFO as a player,
but not 100% sure. Otherwise, isn't there a proposal out there to strip AFO
of its playerhood at the end of the nweek?

Billy Pilgrim

On Nov 25, 2007 7:07 PM, Josiah Worcester <josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sunday 25 November 2007 17:03:10 Ed Murphy wrote:
> > H. Registrar Wooble, can you please fill in the wiki's list of Factions
> > (currently a broken link), even if just to say that there are none?
> >
> > Also, if anyone cares, I intend to register in my own right iff the
> > AFO's playerhood is shot down by the end of the current nweek.
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> >
>
> I think that consultation 39 is now pondered, and the result is that the
> AFO
> is a player. I'm not *sure*, however.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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