1 Sep 2011 21:31
2 Sep 2011 00:03
DIS: Re: OFF: Writ of FAGE
Ed Murphy <emurphy42 <at> socal.rr.com>
2011-09-01 22:03:12 GMT
2011-09-01 22:03:12 GMT
Walker wrote (quoting Wooble): > and WHEREAS I'm unable to perform my official duties as Rulekeepor in > a reasonable fashion because of the size limitations placed upon this > lists by said non-player Taral, can you adjust the exception rule to let the rulesets go through based on subject and/or body instead of sender? (It seems doubtful that any spammers would bother to figure that one out.)
2 Sep 2011 03:44
2 Sep 2011 12:31
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Writ of FAGE
Geoffrey Spear <wooble <at> nomictools.com>
2011-09-02 10:31:53 GMT
2011-09-02 10:31:53 GMT
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42 <at> socal.rr.com> wrote: > Walker wrote (quoting Wooble): > >> and WHEREAS I'm unable to perform my official duties as Rulekeepor in >> a reasonable fashion because of the size limitations placed upon this >> lists by said non-player > > Taral, can you adjust the exception rule to let the rulesets go through > based on subject and/or body instead of sender? (It seems doubtful that > any spammers would bother to figure that one out.) I, uh, may have been completely wrong about the cause of my undelivered SLRs; my message from the previous week showed up ~4 minutes after I tried to send this week's 2 messages, and looking at the headers on that message it may not have been in the Distributor's TDoC until then. In fact, the second Received: header showing that it went from my machine to a Google server was attached a week after I sent the message. I humbly apologize to H. Distributor Taral for calling em a fascist. -- -- Wooble
2 Sep 2011 20:14
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Writ of FAGE
Benjamin Schultz <ben.dov.schultz <at> gmail.com>
2011-09-02 18:14:05 GMT
2011-09-02 18:14:05 GMT
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42 <at> socal.rr.com> wrote: > Walker wrote (quoting Wooble): > >> and WHEREAS I'm unable to perform my official duties as Rulekeepor in >> a reasonable fashion because of the size limitations placed upon this >> lists by said non-player > > Taral, can you adjust the exception rule to let the rulesets go through > based on subject and/or body instead of sender? (It seems doubtful that > any spammers would bother to figure that one out.) > I seem to recall Taral put in an exception for the SLR and FLR once before, back when I was a player. -- -- OscarMeyr
10 Sep 2011 18:48
DIS: Re: [CotC] CFJ 3087 judged UNDECIDABLE, 3078 judged FALSE by scshunt
Ed Murphy <emurphy42 <at> socal.rr.com>
2011-09-10 16:48:50 GMT
2011-09-10 16:48:50 GMT
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=3087 > Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=3088 Informal CoE, accepted: "3078" in subject line is wrong, should be 3088 as in the body.
10 Sep 2011 20:09
10 Sep 2011 22:10
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 7119 - 7124
omd <c.ome.xk <at> gmail.com>
2011-09-10 20:10:39 GMT
2011-09-10 20:10:39 GMT
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Sean Hunt <scshunt <at> csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 13:05, Ed Murphy <emurphy42 <at> socal.rr.com> wrote: >> omd 2A >> >> Quorum 7 7 7 7 7 7 >> Voters 6 7 6 6 6 6 > > hahahaha is it time for me to surrender to B now?
11 Sep 2011 05:19
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3068 judged GUILTY / APOLOGY by Pavitra
Kerim Aydin <kerim <at> u.washington.edu>
2011-09-11 03:19:23 GMT
2011-09-11 03:19:23 GMT
On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Sean Hunt wrote: > Agora may find itself forever locked in the pistachio incident > (details of which are only available at VIOLET or higher clearance). Combined C&H + Paranoia reference = +1 kudo.
11 Sep 2011 05:21
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3068 judged GUILTY / APOLOGY by Pavitra
ais523 <callforjudgement <at> yahoo.co.uk>
2011-09-11 03:21:15 GMT
2011-09-11 03:21:15 GMT
On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 20:19 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Sean Hunt wrote: > > Agora may find itself forever locked in the pistachio incident > > (details of which are only available at VIOLET or higher clearance). > > Combined C&H + Paranoia reference = +1 kudo. Heh, I interpreted it as a C&H reference /reference/, as in referencing the references to C&H rather than the original. -- -- ais523
RSS Feed