Well, I thought the sentence was pretty minor (more so than APOLOGY), but
that's subjective. Feel free to appeal.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 12, 2013, at 9:26 PM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote:
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:13 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
I assume the defendant
I'm arguing that if it's nonsensical and meaningless, it's not truly about
anything, like in the nkep CFJ.
I don't see any reason to a priori prefer otherwise unreasonable
interpretations because they don't cause paradoxes. It's somewhat in the best
interests of the game to avoid them, but
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:49 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote:
I hereby appeal this judgment.
Arguments:
The message was eventually delivered. Per CFJ 1646 and CFJ 2058, it was sent
when it left my technical domain of control, which was before the deadline.
Even if this precedent does not
On May 13, 2013, at 10:25 AM, com...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm arguing that if it's nonsensical and meaningless, it's not truly
about anything, like in the nkep CFJ.
That's fair.
I don't see any reason to a priori prefer otherwise unreasonable
interpretations because they don't cause paradoxes.
I vote:
7428 1 omd, etc. Agoran arms in a rule
FOR
7429 1 omd, etc. Protection Racket
AGAINST
7431 2 Walker (untitled)
AGAINST
7432 1 Walker Downsizing
FOR
7433 3 Walker Rule Changes Fix
FOR
7434 3 omd Fifty-Nine Thirty-Seven
AGAINST
7435 2
NttPF
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote:
I vote:
7428 1 omd, etc. Agoran arms in a rule
FOR
7429 1 omd, etc. Protection Racket
AGAINST
7431 2 Walker (untitled)
AGAINST
7432 1 Walker Downsizing
FOR
...by the way, and I'd like be referred to by that name (if it's not too
much trouble).
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:57 PM, James Beirne james.m.bei...@gmail.com wrote:
...by the way, and I'd like be referred to by that name (if it's not too
much trouble).
Noted. Welcome back.
- The Registrar
8 matches
Mail list logo
