On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While this addresses the original issue with the Vote Market > > agreement, it does not remedy or address the breach of CFJ 1915's > > equation. I will leave it for someone else to determine if that is a > > problem. > > Well, my substantially similar proto was around for almost a whole > week with no comment from any parties to the original equation on its > substance (although Goethe, a party, did comment extensively on legal > issues behind the original solution), and there was no comment from > the parties during the pre-trial phase either. > > If this is appealed, I humbly beg the panel to judge REASSIGN. > Sorry, I didn't come to that realization until I was updating my master copy of the Vote Market Broker's Report with the text of your new equation.
BobTHJ