On Jan 7, 2008 12:02 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I intend to act as following on behalf of the Panel:
>
> The panel overrules to TRUE. The judge has only been cursory in examining
> the purpose of words: eg, communication. In particular, for the purposes
> of apology, we have been flexible in the past, allowed nonsense or difficult
> words so that the apology means something (or is colorful). We have a
> history of allowing color at the expense of strictness here, for example, the
> wordlist in CFJ 1424 included a three word phrase ("peanutty caramel sauce")
> as one word. This word list (2 obscure words, 2 "nonsense" words that have
> previously gained an Agoran context, no worse than choosing "frabjous") is not
> even a particularly egregious example, and communicates the spirit of an
> apology in the context of the Agoran culture of the moment.
I agree to this.
-root
