Geoffrey Spear on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:24:52 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 105. |
On Feb 13, 2008 2:19 PM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Roger Hicks wrote: > > Ah, but I wouldn't say that the Enough Already quasi-proposal actually > > alluded to 4e41. An without a clear answer to Consultation #105, we > > can not know for sure. > > > > BobTHJ > Untrue, someone can submit another Consultation that does not include > the offending reference. In fact, I'll do so. > > I submit the following Consultation: > > {{ > Does there exist a proposal numbered 355 as submitted by BobTHJ? > > Reasoning: > Per Rule 4e2 states that a game object may only be created in > accordance with the rules. Rule 4e15 establishes that Proposals are game > documents. Per 4e7, Submitting a Proposal is a Game Action. Also Per > 4e7, Game Actions must be posted to the Public Forum. The quasi-proposal > numbered 355 never reached the Public Forum, and therefore cannot be a > Proposal. > > Unbeliever: BobTHJ > }} I saw it in the Public Forum. Your message must be alluding to some rule that would mean that although it reached the Forum it was disregarded. _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss