Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Craig S. Dohmen" <CSD108@*****.PSU.EDU>
Subject: sixes
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 13:08:00 EDT
(Sigh) Officially, the rule of 6 does *not* apply to initiative. This
is in the official errata for SR2.

Any estimates on how often this comes up on the list? :)

--Craig (lurker extraordinaire)
Message no. 2
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: sixes
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 10:21:13 -0700
On Mon, 17 Oct 1994, Craig S. Dohmen wrote:

> (Sigh) Officially, the rule of 6 does *not* apply to initiative. This
> is in the official errata for SR2.
>
> Any estimates on how often this comes up on the list? :)

Oh, at least once every two months, more during the beginning of
school when newbies get on the lists ....
Y' think?

> --Craig (lurker extraordinaire)

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 3
From: Stephane Lafrance <Stephane.Lafrance@***.ULAVAL.CA>
Subject: Re: sixes
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 1994 09:43:02 EDT
----------------------[Reply - Original Message]----------------------
Sent by:Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
On Mon, 17 Oct 1994, Craig S. Dohmen wrote:

> (Sigh)
> Any estimates on how often this comes up on the list? :)

Oh, at least once every two months, more during the beginning of
school when newbies get on the lists ....
=====================================================================
Hey guys, why don't you be gentle with the newbies. We want them
to stay on the list!

Note: again, if somebody already said that, ignore the mail.

Stephan

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about sixes, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!