Re: 208:1 (was 207:1) VALID +0.0

From: Ed Murphy (emurphy42_at_socal.rr.com)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 10:33:56 PDT

• Next message: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Previous message: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:1 (was 207:1) VALID +0.0"
• In reply to: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:1 (was 207:1) VALID +0.0"
• Next in thread: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Reply: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Richard Holmes wrote:

> > >All rules must have a descriptor of "Dust", "Wind", or "Dude".
> >
> > VALID, +0.0 style.
>
>Where, I wonder, is this rule's descriptor?

It has three of them, all located within the last four words of
the rule.

-- 
Rule Date: 2003-05-09 07:14:15 GMT

• Next message: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Previous message: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:1 (was 207:1) VALID +0.0"
• In reply to: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: 208:1 (was 207:1) VALID +0.0"
• Next in thread: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Reply: Joshua: "208:3 Dust"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

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