Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members

From: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby) (jjweston_at_kenny.sir-toby.com)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 21:39:31 PST

• Next message: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Previous message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "218:01 VALID +2.0"
• Next in thread: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Reply: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Reply: Stephen Turner: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Ed Murphy: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 02:17:05 +0100 (CET), all committee members
simultaneously became ineligible to post Rules. This unfortunately
includes Ed Murphy, whose Rule started the Round. Anyone care to propose a
solution?

-- 
Jeff Weston (Sir Toby)

• Next message: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Previous message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "218:01 VALID +2.0"
• Next in thread: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Reply: Nathan Russell: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Reply: Stephen Turner: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Ed Murphy: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Maybe reply: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Round 218: No Winner, No Eligible Committee Members"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

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