Proposals 165:A, 169:A, and 169:B

From: Glenn Overby II (guardcaptain_at_earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Oct 03 2001 - 08:57:38 PDT

• Next message: Jesse Welton: "Re: 169:A (more) (fwd)"
• Previous message: Anton Cox: "Re: 169:A (more) (fwd)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I am not certain of the status of Proposal 165:A (Aron) under the Regular
Ordinances.  But I think it will be moot if it does happen to pass.  I vote AGAINST.

I vote AGAINST Proposal 169:A (Tripper) for the reasons specified by the Judge
in his initial ruling and follow-up responses to the list.

I vote AGAINST Proposal 169:B (Aron) as I don't think the Committee should be
judging rules that have not yet been proposed.

Glenn

--
Rule Date: 2001-10-03 15:59:19 GMT

• Next message: Jesse Welton: "Re: 169:A (more) (fwd)"
• Previous message: Anton Cox: "Re: 169:A (more) (fwd)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST