On 8/3/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/3/07, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I appeal the ruling in CFJ 1714 on the grounds that the Judge > > apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "if", the > > concept of stipulating certain conditions, and perhaps formal logic in > > general. I suggest a ruling of REASSIGN. > > If you're trying to avoid an UNDECIDABLE judgement, then I think the > condition -- that the foreign nomic permits Agora to act -- isn't > specific enough. Judge Zefram is saying that it also depends on the > mechanism the foreign nomic defines for Agora's actions. So I read > the judgement here to be essentially "TRUE, assuming the foreign nomic > allows it".
I'd think the wording of the statement to be evaluated would be taken to mean that it's stipulated that the foreign nomic allows it. However, I'll resubmit more explictly. -- Geoffrey Spear http://www.geoffreyspear.com/
