Re: Re: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On Thu, Jan 06, 2000 at 02:53:02PM +0100, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Joe Baptista wrote:
> >
> >Like I said in a prior post, roberts rules are very thorough - i.e. no
> >need to think, just use the index.
> >
> 
> OK. Let's start from the beginning - see Rule #3 (http://
> www.constitution.org/rror/rror-01.htm#3 or quote below).
> 
> This is the procedure for asking the permission to post ;>).
> Note that the rules are very complete indeed, they cover also the proper
>  way to address a lady (married and/or unmarried). I am not under the 
> impression that all ladies have been addressed this way before.
> 
> Then, for non-compliance, we still have rule #73....


Thank you, Mr. Chair.  It's obvious you're taking an extreme position
(detuctio ad absurdum, I believe) to avoid dealing with this.

I did serious work to adopt those rules.  Don't make believe you're going
to go over the same ground flippantly here.

Thank you for the sweat from your brow in helping to make this GA work,
Mr. Chairman.

Furrfu.

-- 
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA