| James Baxter on Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:55:40 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Hm. I can't find any indication that non-enacted proposals are useless. |
> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:39:39 -0700 > From: emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx > To: spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [s-b] Hm. I can't find any indication that non-enacted proposals are useless. > > > CFI: In Rule 79, "its content may be modified using proposals" > should be interpreted as "its content may be modified via the > adoption of a proposal, as specified by that proposal". This is CFI 116. I assign CFI 116 to Judge Gitchel. _________________________________________________________________ http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss