On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
> Of course that question doesn't initiate a CFJ.  But the question this
> case is concerned with was "Do I hereby initiate an inquiry CFJ on
> this sentence?"  The CFJ 1894 translation of that would be "I hereby
> initiate an inquiry CFJ on this sentence."  Do you deny that this
> latter statement would have the effect of initiating a CFJ?

Actually root (sorry to keep coming back to this, it's bugging me), this
is in fact where it falls down for me.  I would say that:

"I hereby initiate an inquiry CFJ on this sentence."

is different from:

I CFJ on the following: "I hereby initiate an inquiry CFJ on this sentence."

The first is a sort of ISID fallacy that confounds/confuses the announcement 
and is therefore ambiguous, while the second is an "announcement which includes 
the statement" (R591p1).  Is there a case where a CFJ was called like this
to refer to as precedent?

-Goethe



Reply via email to