Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? Objecting serves to protect my right to call myself an Agoran resident alien. Also to avoid devaluing Distrib-u-matics.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:25, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 09:18, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: For each of the following proposals, I intend, without 3 objections, to make it Distributable: Anarchy Anarchy I object Abduct the Aliens I object Invasion Alert Level Green I object End of the Accountor I object I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? I thought it was a useful definition, even if it is currently unusued. BobTHJ
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:25, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 09:18, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: For each of the following proposals, I intend, without 3 objections, to make it Distributable: Anarchy Anarchy I object Abduct the Aliens I object Invasion Alert Level Green I object End of the Accountor I object I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? I thought it was a useful definition, even if it is currently unusued. How can something that isn't used possibly be useful? -- Charles Walker
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:38, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:25, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 09:18, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: For each of the following proposals, I intend, without 3 objections, to make it Distributable: Anarchy Anarchy I object Abduct the Aliens I object Invasion Alert Level Green I object End of the Accountor I object I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? I thought it was a useful definition, even if it is currently unusued. How can something that isn't used possibly be useful? Hey, no one said my reasoning had to be logical :) BobTHJ
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
2009/10/22 Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:38, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:25, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? I thought it was a useful definition, even if it is currently unusued. How can something that isn't used possibly be useful? Hey, no one said my reasoning had to be logical :) BobTHJ Oh, but it is. The key word is 'currently'. -- -Tiger
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Decruft Speed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/10/22 Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:38, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:25, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote: I can understand some of these objections, but why are you against repealing a Rule which has only an unused definition in it? I thought it was a useful definition, even if it is currently unusued. How can something that isn't used possibly be useful? Hey, no one said my reasoning had to be logical :) BobTHJ Oh, but it is. The key word is 'currently'. Well, lets repeal it now, and if you ever think of something special to do with it, feel free to bring it back. -- Charles Walker
