> > The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
> > introduce an amendment.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 04:05:11AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Really? I count 6 seconds of Andrew Suffield's proposal of Jan 10
> 22:01:
I was talking about my proposals, not Andrew's.
--
On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 03:52, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:31:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I am confused. Did not several people second earlier versions of your,
> > and others', proposals?
>
> The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
> introduce
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:31:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> I am confused. Did not several people second earlier versions of your,
> and others', proposals?
The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
introduce an amendment.
Also, while I personally think my post recent
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:39:36PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> I'm not sure how to proceed on this non-free issue.
>
> If no one thinks my most recent proposal is worth sponsoring, nor even
> criticising, I guess I should just drop it?
>
> [And, if no one cares to resurrect an earlier version,
> > The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
> > introduce an amendment.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 04:05:11AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Really? I count 6 seconds of Andrew Suffield's proposal of Jan 10
> 22:01:
I was talking about my proposals, not Andrew's.
--
I'm not sure how to proceed on this non-free issue.
If no one thinks my most recent proposal is worth sponsoring, nor even
criticising, I guess I should just drop it?
[And, if no one cares to resurrect an earlier version, ...]
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 03:52, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:31:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I am confused. Did not several people second earlier versions of your,
> > and others', proposals?
>
> The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
> introduce
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:31:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> I am confused. Did not several people second earlier versions of your,
> and others', proposals?
The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
introduce an amendment.
Also, while I personally think my post recent
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:39:36PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> I'm not sure how to proceed on this non-free issue.
>
> If no one thinks my most recent proposal is worth sponsoring, nor even
> criticising, I guess I should just drop it?
>
> [And, if no one cares to resurrect an earlier version,
I'm not sure how to proceed on this non-free issue.
If no one thinks my most recent proposal is worth sponsoring, nor even
criticising, I guess I should just drop it?
[And, if no one cares to resurrect an earlier version, ...]
Thanks,
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10 matches
Mail list logo