| Jamie Dallaire on Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:02:12 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Emergency |
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Jamie Dallaire > <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Speaking of which, maybe we should restrict PEP definition to active > > players, or redefine reasonable effort to mean posting to the PF if it is > up > > and running. > > Alternatively: the rule says "notify other PEPs", not "notify all > other PEPs". That's *wide* open for scamming and should be closed > immediately if we use it to justify this emergency (and all prior > ones), but it's how I read the rules as written. So I think we're good > for now, but by God that one needs fixing. > > (I'll be participating in the non-Wooble emergency, assuming it is > legit, but not in Wooble's emergency where I am not a PEP.) And teucer saves the day!!! By golly, he's right. We're good. 29 hours left for voting --- we need a ballot. It DOES need fixing, yes. Had it said all other peps (to respond to the point in another post about not having 4 of Charles around), we'd have to backtrack to late '06 (now at least an identifiable point in time, thanks to Wooble's efforts) to check who panicked/depanicked/deregistered and when, in order to see whether at least 4 of the currently inactive-but-still-registereds were in a panic... Yeah... BP _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss