On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:47, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I call for judgement on the following statement: "This CFJ has ID number
> 2146."
> I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> CFJ an ID number of 2146.
> I call for judgement on the following statement:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:47, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I call for judgement on the following statement: "This CFJ has ID number
> 2146."
> I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> CFJ an ID number of 2146.
> I call for judgement on the following statement:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:01 -0700, Charles Reiss wrote:
> Oh, I see you address the INVALID bit here. So easy counterargument:
> it is plainly NOT required for the CotC to assign the ID number 1 or
> any other invalid assignment. In fact, the CotC CANNOT do that and
> SHALL NOT do that (by virtue o
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:04 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Arguably, there are two requirements: the CotC SHALL assign an ID
> number, and the CotC SHALL assign the smallest possible legal ID number.
> The Monster was deputising based on the first, not on the second.
It doesn't matter wha
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:22 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:04 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Arguably, there are two requirements: the CotC SHALL assign an ID
> > number, and the CotC SHALL assign the smallest possible legal ID number.
> > The Monster was deputis
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, ais523 wrote:
> I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> CFJ an ID number of 1.
It's fun to see the Monster add up to something, been hoping it would :)
I mean, it's not a monster until it comes alive and starts attacking and
we have to chase i
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, ais523 wrote:
> > I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> > CFJ an ID number of 1.
>
> It's fun to see the Monster add up to something, been hoping it would :)
> I mean, it's not a monst
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, rule 2161 says "such an assignment"; my assignment was sufficiently
> unusual that I don't think it qualifies as "such an assignment", and
> therefore is not forbidden by rule 2161.
I disagree. R2193 only empowers the Monste
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Pavitra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I mill 5/8=2 and 5*5=3.
>> I harvest the number of CFJ 2137 for 2 WRV.
>
> I create two WRV in Pavitra's possession.
Why? 2137 wasn't eligible.
--
Taral
9 matches
Mail list logo
