Hello to you too Charles.
I have seen a bit of talk about an active IRC channel. Is that still up?
Matthew Berlin
arkes...@gmail.com
535 Misty Patch Rd.
Coatesville, PA 19320
(484) 832-1055
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 28 Jun 2013 21:32, "Matt Berlin
Are objects of this type (Ribbons, and Yaks for that matter) considered
inherently transferable, or does a rule need to exist to make them so?
Matthew Berlin
arkes...@gmail.com
535 Misty Patch Rd.
Coatesville, PA 19320
(484) 832-1055
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On
Salt the hash with the recipient of the action's name, and you can greatly
cut down on the collisions.
Matthew Berlin
arkes...@gmail.com
535 Misty Patch Rd.
Coatesville, PA 19320
(484) 832-1055
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 22:25 +0100, Elliott Hird
R2410 seems to provide the ability, but not the means, to amend the party's
constitution.
Matthew Berlin
arkes...@gmail.com
535 Misty Patch Rd.
Coatesville, PA 19320
(484) 832-1055
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> I CFJ on: "A party is a nomic."
>
> Evidence:
>
> R2368:
Yes, I believe that was the original intent of the rule, though not how it
is written. Would support amendment.
Also, this may apply to me. Is there a chronological record of
registrations/deregistrations/holds?
- arkestra
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Mon, 8
> An Elder is a first-class player who has been registered continuously for
at least 32 days
Future Perfect Progressive Tense ( ie, happened in the past, is still going
on, and may continue in the future) requires the present participle of the
verb. I don't think "registered" would work for this
Wow -- news to me. Will get on that ASAP.
Shouldn't have been standing I suppose...
Matthew Berlin
arkes...@gmail.com
535 Misty Patch Rd.
Coatesville, PA 19320
(484) 832-1055
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan Rouillard <
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is, CFJ 3361, assig
I CFJ'd earlier this week, eventually getting it into the correct Fora.
However, I have not seen it referenced, accepted, etc.
Was my statement ineffective due to syntax, or was it overlooked, or does
it just take a while for the relevant Officers to dole out the cases?
- arkestra
Does fool's announcement of intent to destroy a promise:
a) destroy the promise
b) begin the destruction of the promise
c) schedule the destruction of the promise
d) place a time-limit on the action of destroying the promise
e) only announce intent
I'm approaching from "order of operations".
- a
9 matches
Mail list logo
