| Jamie Dallaire on Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:15:17 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Fix Rule 0 |
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:02 PM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Elliott Hird wrote: > >> >> On 3 Jan 2009, at 21:24, 0x44 wrote: >> >> Hm, s-n may be a Public Forum, but is not labeled so on the public >>> display. >>> >> >> Well, it is. >> > Unless the public display self-ratified without s-n being defined as a > public forum. self-ratification went out with the RP (actually a little before, in my counter-scam on wooble's self-ratification scam) that define s-n as public. BP _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss