On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I should look this up, but note that we have in the past accepted
>> dictatorship rules of the form "[player name] CAN do whatever by
>> announcement" without any special explicitness, and currently have a
>> (non-scam) rule that mentions Taral
omd wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Michael Norrish
> wrote:
>> I think I remember something similar. Â I certainly wrote a judgement that
>> defeated such an attempt. Â I used the "Alice Through the Looking Glass"
>> argument that being called something, and having something as a name
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Michael Norrish
wrote:
> I think I remember something similar. I certainly wrote a judgement that
> defeated such an attempt. I used the "Alice Through the Looking Glass"
> argument that being called something, and having something as a name are not
> necessarily
On 27/08/10 04:35, Kerim Aydin wrote:
The more I think of it, the more surprised I am that I can't remember
anyone trying this scam. We've had plenty of attempted hardcodings of
players into rules/proposals (e.g. "G. can amend this rule") or "comex
is hereby awarded X") but I can't remember anyo
G. wrote:
> The more I think of it, the more surprised I am that I can't remember
> anyone trying this scam. We've had plenty of attempted hardcodings of
> players into rules/proposals (e.g. "G. can amend this rule") or "comex
> is hereby awarded X") but I can't remember anyone trying to change
The more I think of it, the more surprised I am that I can't remember
anyone trying this scam. We've had plenty of attempted hardcodings of
players into rules/proposals (e.g. "G. can amend this rule") or "comex
is hereby awarded X") but I can't remember anyone trying to change
their name to i
6 matches
Mail list logo
