--- Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/31/07, Grey Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Due to a technical error, my first Notice of Rotation was > ineffective. > > The assignments of CFJs 1607, 1608, and 1609, as well as the second > > Notice of Rotation following them should also be considered in > error. > > This is exactly the kind of situation that the fourth paragraph of > R1871 is intended to address. > > -root >
However, the situation here is the reverse of that described in R1871; it talks about "selecting a Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal who is not eligible to judge that CFJ or Appeal solely because e is turned", whereas here the Player in question *was* eligible, and what is more my mistaken criterion for declaring Manu ineligible was because of being "on hold" rather than being turned. God bless, The Grey Knight [ greyfire island ] :: http://www.greyfire.org ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
