Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration

Craig Daniel on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:47:05 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
From: Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:46:59 -0500
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jetR93OftjBRPs7qBITOjVVSenmZA37t4Z2ZAcsnjKU=; b=Gl93QtyL4qpTF+JQlIzUlLC4KA+HXDfYW7lmIho66sKycjotaWqE7N6p6woyx/86/j ZWMA4bvxi4N375lmzBS39Jm9e6XyXl7y7Na31lu3IM+tNttXADOWnnE+x+vsskSB81wK rWZGuxUz0cVr0RYxfMLB96NrvJGhkOqRpJsqw=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=qBIUslEzr9ciesQi0JEVD7kwvWLlmFY8/Zxwal0yI041wZr/iV0QgGfKi3BzhdFhcL lflT94bOS1Rk83N/mERxllls+SfS23xrl4qzQOPV3XMWJ8IMpUjvL6Bzo6/l83Y04V8A 7uz0Q/s6HxToyokyEM4/fHwS/4pXmtcgvSkVA=
In-reply-to: <ca8a6ddc0902131513vf670e4ci75cd869033957ff6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <653283240902131324k591aa5e0u8dff9e01fd859cac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ca8a6ddc0902131505k5f94aad9i6993308bcb2ea592@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <55b258c20902131508m485c85deqa7dbcee0030767bc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ca8a6ddc0902131513vf670e4ci75cd869033957ff6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Cassie Bayer <kisse.bnomic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Oh, I have no problem dealing with über-high-levels of pedantry.  If we want
> to get super über-pedantic, then we should use the rules as they exist
> should be used to "bootstrap" an entirely different set of rules.

That's how we typically do things, yes.

The more likely rules are the ones that involve Dave, or the ones we
thought were right all along but with some stuff commented out -
unless that stuff has come to include important things, in which case
the rules whenever said stuff got commented out in the first place.

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

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
  - From: Cassie Bayer
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
  - From: Craig Daniel
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
  - From: Cassie Bayer

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Point of Order
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] declaration
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread