Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.

Josiah Worcester on Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:02:13 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
From: Josiah Worcester <josiahw@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:02:06 -0700
In-reply-to: <6d741b990712311000k3acfbedke5fd001c10966a4c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200712311049.44989.josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> <200712311058.30028.josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> <6d741b990712311000k3acfbedke5fd001c10966a4c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.9.7

On Monday 31 December 2007 11:00:10 Mike McGann wrote:
> On Dec 31, 2007 12:58 PM, Josiah Worcester <josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >
> > That will remove the rule "Rules", which is also inconsistent. Damned if
> > you
> > do, damned if you don't. ;)
> >
> >
> No it won't. Where does it specify in the Rules that this would occur?
> 
> - Hose
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> 

The consultation in specific. Did you *read* it? It asked if there was a rule 
titled "Rules". If this consultation is overturned, then rule 36 ceases to 
exist, as does the Ministry of Law.

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

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
  - From: Josiah Worcester
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
  - From: Mike McGann

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Yes.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread