Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B

0x44 on Wed, 8 Oct 2008 18:09:11 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B
From: 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:06:41 -0500
In-reply-to: <44e5a2650810072127j53668a88q8e71b3a1b9b74a0f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <48EC31A5.50608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650810072112p1e39eb34rbb0ef1de25e9f37a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <48EC34D7.1010505@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <48EC35B4.8060609@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650810072127j53668a88q8e71b3a1b9b74a0f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)

Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> How can B affect C like that (the last sentence)? Especially once the only rule B has that ties their states together has been repealed in B?
C's game state should be identical to B's up until this rule is passed, 
so all votes for this rule should take place simultaneously in C and B. 
Upon passage this rule should take effect in both Nomics.


-- 
--
0x44;

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

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B
  - From: Jamie Dallaire
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Unlocking J's Holding Company
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] New Contract
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Free C With Purchase of B
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread