On Dec 3, 2007 12:45 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My counterargument is that Fookiemyartug did not attempt to bind > anyone under its contract or arbitrarily award a win. It only did so > in response to Agora's action which was taken with Agoran Consent. > Agora, in effect, authorized the win.
That was the reason I didn't invoke CFJ 1455 in my appeal arguments; the judge's arguments in that case are not quite apropos. It doesn't make your reasoning sound, though. You haven't yet responded to my earlier comparison of this to a hypothetical B Nomic rule reading "Whenever Agora adopts a proposal, they are also surrendering". Clearly, if B Nomic had such a rule, and we adopted a proposal, we would not consider that to be an act of surrender. What makes this case any different? -root
