Wooble wrote: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2027a >>> >>> ============================ Appeal 2027a ============================ >> I intend, with the support of my fellow panelists, to cause the panel >> to judge as follows: >> >> Rule 2166 does not seem to define "recordkeepors" in general, just >> recordkeepors of classes of assets. Rule 2125's usage does not refer >> to assets, but to information in general. Strong game custom as well >> as the precedent in CFJ 1576 hold that the officer who tracks any sort >> of information as part of eir duties is the recordkeepor of that >> information. The panel judges OVERRULE with a replacement judgment of >> TRUE. >> > > Any thoughts on this, Sgeo? And CotC Murphy, would you be willing to > support this ruling if Sgeo does? If not, you may as well recuse the > panel.
Yes.
