Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DPL could 'unvet' the first one and then vet the second one. [...]
Even if it was vetted and failed, it was still vetted, unless there's
time travel. I suggest that the vetting limit wouldn't make sense.
> The point of the exercise is to avoid hav
Filipus Klutiero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I had to Google the meaning of "fooing the man instead of the ball". If
> there are still other readers at this point, this seems to mean "to
> focus on the person doing something rather than on something". [...]
It's from football (the obscure sport with a
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong said:
> > My fear is that some newly founded organization is veted by some
> > future Evil DPL, assets are transfered and dispersed wihtout
> > allowing some lead time for people to examine the situtation.
>
> what is eno
MJR:
I am not taking the "pretending" flame-bait this time. There
is no reason to doubt my sincerity. Argue I'm misguided if
you want, but don't resort to public attacks on me.
I could see some reasons, but I'm happy to skip these and consider that
both of us were misguided since you seem
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 08:04:01AM -0400, Jose Parrella wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 08:59:10AM +0200, Enrico Zini escribió:
>>
>>A little ago I've read the news that Venezuela is going to train 40
>>people on basic Linux use. Four hundred thousands. YOU ROCK!
>>
>>The courses were due to
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Err, Would Evil DPL actually pay that much attention to the
> constitution?
Probably not, but who would hold them to the constitution?
Or would the constitution be rewritten to match DPL actions
after they've been actively working against its
On 14 Jun 2006, Don Armstrong said:
[Snipping away stuff that needs more thought to reply to]
>> Well, I am not sure. §4.2.2.2 means that such a decision by the DPL
>> can be immediately put on hold, well before any funds are
>> committed. I don't see how delaying decisions to authorize or
>> u
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060613 20:08]:
> Should we move the bit about SPI to an external no-foundation
> document? I would be open to that, but it would be nice if I see
> some indication other people agree with aj and me.
Has anyone asked the lawyers about the consequen
8 matches
Mail list logo
