comex wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008 11:36 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I intend [with two support] to appeal this.
Arguments: Judgement is not sufficiently verbose and does not appeal
to sufficiently esoteric sources for its logic.
My attempt to appeal Eris's judgement of CFJ 1879 garnered the following votes:
comex: SUPPORT (implicit)
Iammars: SUPPORT
Pavrita: SUPPORT
woggle: FOR (not a valid vote on a dependent action)
To reduce the ambiguity to a matter of a timestamp, could you please
re-report this with woggle's vote listed as AGAINT?
