Three things: a) No, you didn't, it didn't reach the list, but Gmail had nothing to do with it.
b) I don't want to argue with you, but what is Obama's connection to this? c) Grab your politics and run miles away with it, it doesn't belong in Agora. On 11/22/2017 04:53 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > it wasn't going to be rule-breaking (was pledge-breaking). I did > actually commit 3,000 infractions and give myself 3,000 actual cards. > just gmail sucks. thaks obama. > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 15:52 Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 20:39 +0000, Alexis Hunt wrote: >>>>> Ahh, hmm, I think that might work provided we can get a non-player to >>>>> call sufficient CFJs. Given the volume we couldn't do it with Shinies >>>>> alone. >>>> I can do 5, but am unwilling to violate the rules as part of a >>>> counterscam. (Also, I haven't thought of good topics for them yet.) >>> I think in the volume needed, we're looking at rules-violation regardless, >>> someone can correct me if I'm wrong. (I also would not be up to rules- >>> breaking to stop a Win. A dictatorship maybe but not just a win). >>> >>> If we *did* go that route, I'd number the CFJs fractionally and list >>> them all under a single whole number, so I wouldn't use CFJs that actually >>> have some interest for anyone. >>> >> I'm more willing to use rule-breaking to stop a win that is itself a >> product of blatant rule-breaking. I would not use it for a different kind >> of win. > > -- ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
