Ian Kelly wrote: >> 5193 Di 2 Zefram calendar cleanup >AGAINST. Could cause R2149-related problems due to the imprecision of >our clocks.
Interesting point. I think we've likely got such a problem already, if we have it at all. We should really have a rule about interpretation of email messages, including particularly that timestamps are only approximate by default. >> 5195 Di 3 Zefram stronger definition of paradox >AGAINST. The win should still be awarded if the judgement is affirmed >on appeal. It still would, under the interpretation I intended, but on rereading I find it's not brilliantly clear. In my interpretation, a judgement in an inquiry case can perfectly well result from an appeal decision (either an AFFIRM or an OVERRULE). Such a judgement would not be appealed; it cannot be appealed, because the rules that allow initiation of appeals make an exception for judgements resulting from appeals. -zefram
