[ANSTHRLD] March LoAR
chemistbb3 at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 2 20:05:41 PDT 2003
I did notice the - as a matter of fact, but
Atenveldt, as an example, also had the dreaded -
while they did have something listed in the LoAR.
Caid had the - but they also had none listed in
the LoAR, and Ansteorra had nothing listed at all. I
was a little confused by all this and so I asked the
question, believing the only stupid question is the
So, if a submission has the following notation, is it
being considered based on the 11/02, 1/03, or 2/03
Kingdom accepted 1/03 (AG 2/03).
I would have expected it to be considered based on the
11/02 date but now
Im so confused!!!!
--- Jennifer Smith <jds at randomgang.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 06:18:21PM -0700, Bill
> Butler wrote:
> > OK, I've checked the newly posted LoAR on the
> > site. As a mater of fact, I've checked it twice.
> > have not found anything there from Ansteorra. Did
> > miss something or did the Kingdom just not get
> > anything through on the March edition?
> We had nothing. If you'll check the cover letter
> you'll notice
> the second column is for the March meetings, and
> Ansteorra has a big "-"
> in that column as our "Letter of Intent being
> considered". You'll also
> notice that our Dec 18 letter was scheduled for the
> April meetings.
> A glance at the "Status of ILoIs" table in the
> gazette shows that the
> normal November LoI was combined with the December
> LoI, so that explains
> why we had nothing in the March Laurel letter.
> -Emma de Fetherstan
> Jennifer Smith
> jds at randomgang.com
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at ansteorra.org
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
More information about the Heralds