Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization

Mike McGann on Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:06:53 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization

To: "B:Discussion" <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
From: "Mike McGann" <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 18:06:48 -0500
In-reply-to: <56732cfd0802051424x28dbcfafj76ae549a8104e584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <169695.7652.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650802051302q252c6beekc04fc5885c10eebe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <56732cfd0802051424x28dbcfafj76ae549a8104e584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Feb 5, 2008 5:24 PM, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008 2:02 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > from 4E41: ''This applies to specific references to Rule 4E41 or to a set of
> > Rules or a block of text containing it....''
> >
> A rule section is neither a set of rules nor a block of text that
> contains 4e41. It is simply an identifier for certain rules.

And that text is comment text so it doesn't actually do anything. I
fail to see the reasoning on how BobTHJ's actions are illegal.

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
  - From: Justin Ahmann
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
  - From: Jamie Dallaire
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
  - From: Roger Hicks

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] purchases, turnings
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Come to me, Undead Puppet!
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Rule Categorization
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread