DIS: Re: BUS: Agreement
Would, even. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 18, 2012, at 11:36 PM, com...@gmail.com wrote: > You will nod you, indeed! > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 18, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > >> I transfer a ruble to Nuas Te. >> >> -scshunt
DIS: Re: BUS: Agreement
You will nod you, indeed! Sent from my iPhone On Jun 18, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I transfer a ruble to Nuas Te. > > -scshunt
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal
Thanks, I meant the latter. I'll repropose (, distribute, etc.) tomorrow. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 18, 2012, at 9:12 PM, Tanner Swett wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:12 PM, omd wrote: >> Casting a vote for PRESENT is equivalent to endorsing the >> Speaker (the identity of the Speaker is part of the condition). > > "The identity of the Speaker is part of the condition" is perfectly > ambiguous. It could mean either "the current identity of the Speaker > is hard-coded into the condition", or "the vote is conditional upon > the identity of the Speaker". > > ―Machiavelli
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:12 PM, omd wrote: > Casting a vote for PRESENT is equivalent to endorsing the > Speaker (the identity of the Speaker is part of the condition). "The identity of the Speaker is part of the condition" is perfectly ambiguous. It could mean either "the current identity of the Speaker is hard-coded into the condition", or "the vote is conditional upon the identity of the Speaker". —Machiavelli
DIS: Re: BUS: Let's get things moving
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:51 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote: > *scshunt violated Rule 2158 by failing to assign judgement to case 3218 > ASAP after it was assigned to em. Evidence: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=3218 Arguments: It wasn't me, boss! -scshunt
