| Revision as of 23:13, 18 April 2008 editDavidPaulHamilton (talk | contribs)237 edits reply to Greg← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:13, 26 April 2008 edit undoFnagaton (talk | contribs)3,957 edits →It looks like Bondwell is being edited: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| *Thanks. I will read the proposal when I am not tired.] (]) 23:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC) | *Thanks. I will read the proposal when I am not tired.] (]) 23:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == It looks like ] is being edited == | |||
| It looks like ] is being edited to revert your changes. ''']]''' 13:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:13, 26 April 2008
New MOSNUM policy to address more than just binary prefixes
Since you voted on a proposal to no longer routinely use the IEC prefixes (kibibytes & KiB), I thought you’d be interested to know that the best we could muster at this time is a more general principal here on MOSNUM. I’m sorry I couldn’t deliver anything better at the moment. However, I hope you will agree that it speaks to the basic principal underlying that whole debate. Greg L (talk) 03:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will read the proposal when I am not tired.DavidPaulHamilton (talk) 23:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
It looks like Bondwell is being edited
It looks like Bondwell is being edited to revert your changes. Fnagaton 13:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)