Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships

Josiah Worcester on Tue, 4 Dec 2007 03:39:26 +0100 (CET)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
From: Josiah Worcester <josiahw@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:39:18 -0700
In-reply-to: <6d741b990712031834q397ca08eq9c4e263d1d3199d1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200712031824.01363.josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> <200712031924.27508.josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> <6d741b990712031834q397ca08eq9c4e263d1d3199d1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.9.7

On Monday 03 December 2007 19:34:49 Mike McGann wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what the reasoning or purpose is for having
> partnerships and/or factions?
> 
> - Hose
> 

In Agora, at least, partnerships were first brought in via a bug in the rule 
defining persons. . . Rules were added to define it a bit better, and thereby 
have fun with it.
In B Nomic? No idea.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
  - From: Josiah Worcester
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
  - From: Mike McGann

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] Transclusion on the Wiki
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Sane Partnerships
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread