# Is it time to enforce the five post rule? *The Urth list — 4 messages, 2 voices, 09 Jul 2010* > Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright > in each message remains with the person who wrote it. > Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original > archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than > retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact. --- ### Dan'l Danehy-Oakes *09 Jul 2010, 21:16* ``` Dan'l Danehy-Oakes ``` --- ### James Wynn *09 Jul 2010, 21:23 · in reply to Dan'l Danehy-Oakes* The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. ~ Babylon 5 --- ### Dan'l Danehy-Oakes *09 Jul 2010, 21:29 · in reply to James Wynn* If you're going to cite Koshisms ... "You have forgotten something." > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, James Wynn wrote: > The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. ~ > Babylon 5 > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List --- ### James Wynn *09 Jul 2010, 21:38 · in reply to Dan'l Danehy-Oakes* > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, James Wynn wrote: > The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. ~ > Babylon 5 > > On 7/9/2010 4:29 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote: > If you're going to cite Koshisms ... > > "You have forgotten something." > I actually got the insinuation. Subtle. Nice! "This ain't a democracy." But is today really the moment to call the cops? Perhaps a couple days ago, yeah. But today? On the other hand, perhaps the best time to firmly establish the rule is when the need least requires it. That is, if the Decider still thinks it is a good rule. u+16b9 ---