On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Err, I guess this is a CFJ again. I support this intent. > > It is? What did I miss?
CFJ 2090, although you obviously didn't miss it since you appealed it. Of course, if the appeal is successful this will cease to be a CFJ again and we'll no longer be horribly late in assigning a judgment.
