Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?

0x44 on Thu, 8 Oct 2009 14:09:37 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
From: 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:09:32 +0000
In-reply-to: <dc05cc2c0910081331w5c5201e7jb5cfa141c16e8caa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <SNT109-W252CF68D04DF8C84967C6185CC0@xxxxxxx> <dc05cc2c0910081323o1ad6f43ctdfb3098e0bcf0037@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <2d3f17cb2b301b98177300588ee81bd1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <dc05cc2c0910081331w5c5201e7jb5cfa141c16e8caa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: RoundCube Webmail


On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:31:40 +0100, Charles Walker
<charles.w.walker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:28 PM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I object, there was no scam.
> 
> Well, the fact that if there is only one RP it automatically wins is a
> pretty big loophole. Whether it is the fault of the rules, or the
> players for not submitting RPs or not, is debatable.

It would have won anyway, I was the only PEP to cast a vote.

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

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
  - From: Charles Walker

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] maybe we should retry the emergency?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread