On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 11:23 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I initiate a criminal case accusing OscarMeyr of violating Rule 2149 >> by claiming that tusho could not have violated any rules because e was >> not a player. [...] > assessment was accurate. As CFJ 2109 was filed in response to this CFJ > which was in response to my assessment in CFJ 2088, my belief must be > evaluated as of the time I published my ruling. Accordingly, I argue for a > ruling of INNOCENT.
But you did claim tusho could not have violated any rules because e was not a player. If you believed this to be true at the time, the correct ruling would be UNIMPUGNED.
