On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Taral wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
No interpretation of Agoran law may limit the right of participation
in the fora; therefore any interpretation of the law claiming that a
forum G. could not reasonably access is a
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
No interpretation of Agoran law may limit the right of participation
in the fora; therefore any interpretation of the law claiming that a
forum G. could not reasonably access is a public forum is INVALID.
Do we really
Yes. A message is public if sent via a public forum, whether or not that
message reaches any player.
I disagree, based on my memory of the precedent of what via means.
Otherwise, indeed, it would be trivial as you say and uninteresting
Forget the CFJ # but will go look now that I seem to be
On Sun, 28 Mar 2010, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Yes. A message is public if sent via a public forum, whether or not that
message reaches any player.
I disagree, based on my memory of the precedent of what via means.
Otherwise, indeed, it would be trivial as you say and uninteresting
Forget the CFJ
On 03/29/2010 12:02 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Yes. A message is public if sent via a public forum, whether or not that
message reaches any player.
I disagree, based on my memory of the precedent of what via means.
Otherwise, indeed, it would be trivial as you say and uninteresting
Forget the
On 03/29/2010 12:08 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On another note, an actual Vote I sent bounced (got the bounce messages)
just before a voting period ended last week. It was too late for me to
re-send that, even to BAK. What's the consequences, there? -G.
Consequences in what sense?
-coppro
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, Sean Hunt wrote:
I agree with your extension of via; the message would have to go from a
source, through the forum, to the destination. There is no requirement every
player receive the message (as was abused to great effect when the Registrar
made an IRC channel a
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd say they were violated, but then reinstated in a reasonable time.
However, since the rights were not violated by anything R101 claims
jurisdiction over, you would be out of luck. Of course, you would be excused
of not
On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 23:32 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, Sean Hunt wrote:
I agree with your extension of via; the message would have to go from a
source, through the forum, to the destination. There is no requirement
every
player receive the message (as was abused to
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, ais523 wrote:
It's also worth noting that G. could have sent messages via backup fora
and received them via looking at the online archives. I think that that
effort is not unreasonable; however, the issue is that there was no
information to let G. know that that's what he
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Yes. A message is public if sent via a public forum, whether or not that
message reaches any player.
I disagree, based on my memory of the precedent of what via means.
Otherwise, indeed, it would be trivial as you say
On 03/28/2010 11:19 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010, Taral wrote:
I didn't update the SPF records when the mail server moved. So... some
people have been unsubscribed due to bounces. It's fixed, but will
take a few hours to propagate.
I am one of the persons to whom this happened.
12 matches
Mail list logo
