Re: [s-d] Grand Chancellor?

comex on Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:05:33 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] Grand Chancellor?

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] Grand Chancellor?
From: comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:04:23 -0500
In-reply-to: <6d741b990712111903m6aaef326ubfcbe852651d459a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200712111942.14961.josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> <475F4DCE.6040005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6d741b990712111903m6aaef326ubfcbe852651d459a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.9.7

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Mike McGann wrote:
> The "actions are not considered valid until..." is not stated as such in
> the rules but seems to be an interpretation of the rules. To determine
> what happened or not needs some kind of judgment and I don't know how we
> can resolve that unless by OOB action.

How could you possibly interpret 1-10 otherwise?

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] Grand Chancellor?
  - From: Mike McGann

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Grand Chancellor?
  - From: 0x44
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Grand Chancellor?
  - From: Mike McGann

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Grand Chancellor?
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] Grand Chancellor?
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Grand Chancellor?
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] Grand Chancellor?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread