On 2/8/08, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does this mean that a single player can indefinitely delay the > ratification of any document without violating rule 2149 simply by > making claims of error that are themselves true statements but that > are completely irrelevant to the document in question? (e.g., claim of > error: 2+2=4)
All I'd have to do to indefinitely delay the ratification of something is call an inquiry case on it. But I didn't want to waste the courts' time. So sue me, Zefram :)
