On Monday 13 August 2007, Ed Murphy wrote: > No, it isn't. S/(S+O) = 0/(0+0) = 0/0 = 0 (Rule 2146), which > is <= 1/2 (Rule 2124), so the OSbA is REJECTED (Rule 955).
You're right. Therefore, my notice resolving the decision was invalid, so the decision is still active. Would you like to vote SUPPORT or OBJECT? --nextPart303170 1.WKrVXULBfR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGwShxCE4dAOE9sY0RArfhAKCiOCeLO77XKKa6uDUuy0uKCGVgMgCeLKbj sLbyrHiH7g/OdI18Q79GJf8=bxKh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
