Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

News: Citoyen reminder: Socioendangerment levels run from one to sixteen. Cooperation with mandatory sentencing from the Citoyen-Mediator may result in decreased rehabilitation length.

Author Topic: Re: The Supreme Court Docket  (Read 1709 times)

Offline DrenEgralA

  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: The Supreme Court Docket
« on: May 02, 2007, 12:32:26 AM »
I may not have the right to post here, but I feel the need to ask, was the thread in question dead?  If so, Myrorian Theocratic Empereum made the correct judgment in deleting it. 

Allowing the forum to be clogged with past topics that are no longer timely or relevant affects the free speech of everyone who uses this forum.

Offline Eluvatar

  • Tech Monkey
  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • O_O
    • Taijitu.org
Re: Re: The Supreme Court Docket
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2007, 02:15:04 AM »
Please refrain from posting anything other than a complaint in the docket.
                                 
(click to show/hide)

Offline DrenEgralA

  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: The Supreme Court Docket
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2007, 02:18:43 AM »
Thanks EL, I didn't know the procedure.   
But if it's posted in a public area, the rules for replying to the public posting should be mentioned as well.
Again, thanks for the correction in procedure.

Offline Eluvatar

  • Tech Monkey
  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • O_O
    • Taijitu.org
Re: Re: The Supreme Court Docket
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2007, 02:33:00 AM »
Thanks EL, I didn't know the procedure.   
But if it's posted in a public area, the rules for replying to the public posting should be mentioned as well.
Again, thanks for the correction in procedure.

The rules were specified. It stated exactly how complaints were to be made, and stated the topic was for them. It also stated to say nothing else.
                                 
(click to show/hide)

Offline DrenEgralA

  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: The Supreme Court Docket
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2007, 02:39:51 AM »
whoops, i see now, i missed that one small sentence in the original post.  sorry el.