Goethe wrote:
The issue of cron jobs is where Judge Zefram and I differ, and I'm considering both those judgments and my own initial thoughts carefully.
Since Zefram uses cron jobs, I assume e considers them legally effective. Does that mean that you don't? Or is the distinction on some more subtle point? CFJ 866 set the precedent that a person receives a message when it enters eir "normal technical domain of control". The obvious counterpart to this is that a person sends a message when it leaves eir NTDoC. I don't think it's legally significant what tools a person uses to exercise eir NTDoC (traditional MUA, copy+paste, CotC DB, cron job, etc.) - Peekee's "send e-mails labeled as coming from me" web form from CFJ 1719 would be a more significant borderline case.
