On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh an offer comex: I'll withdraw my criminal CFJ if you withdraw yours > (and feel free to add your arguments to the criminal case that root > brought against me). I'll consider this offer of agreement accepted if > you do so (at which point I'll withdraw mine and make a generic inquiry > case on the matter).
I would accept this, but I think that your/the panel's judgement may well be appropriate. Doubt is defined as a lack of certainty; there is definitely a "serious" lack of certainty about whether or not ais523's contest-judgement was appropriate, evidenced by the CFJ on the matter. This would normally be sufficient grounds for a reassignment and legally everything is in order-- except that the appeal judgement did not interpret the vagueness in the rules in the best interests of the game or according to game custom. If this misstep is sufficiently egregious, you may be GUILTY by my CFJ but INNOCENT by root's. By the way, the above is another reason why R101 should not be interpreted such that I am guilty. If I wanted to break a rule and get away with it, with this interpretation, I need only break the rule then immediately initiate a criminal case against myself claiming that I violated some other random rule with my action. I would be UNIMPUGNED and nobody could initiate a criminal case for the real violation.
