On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm interpreting anyone who voted TETRAHEDRON without having seen this > pledge as having implicitly assumed that ais523 would specify exactly > one definition during the voting period, and agreed to that definition, > in particular waiving their R101(v) right.
Certainly not. This interpretation could only be feasible if it were actually known ahead of time that TETRAHEDRON would be a contract. You can't waive your R101(v) right unknowingly. -root
