On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:53 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not to distract from your overall point, but picking a nit: didn't we > have a precedent that every player was notified if something was sent to the > PF, a person was notified if something was sent to their registered e-mail > address, but there was *no guarantee* that someone was notified by a > message sent to discussion?
Yes, CFJ 1888. Contrast, though, Judge Zefram's arguments in CFJ 1916, where e argued that publicity was unnecessary for consent. We may need to draw some fairly subtle distinctions in order to distinguish in this case. I'm not sure.
