On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Alex Smith wrote: > Well, the way it used to be was that the judge did informs, and the > Notary informed them of the parties. A proposal a while back introduced > a bug in this by changing the informs from the judge to the CotC (it was > after I joined, so quite recent). This is, of course, why you SHOULD > inform the Notary; so that judicial cases with respect to the contract > can go through expediently.
Unless of course you'd rather the courts stayed out of your private affairs, in which case this is part of the full implications that you weigh when not doing something that you SHOULD. I'm please that the UNDEAD (*if* it exists, its existence I neither confirm nor deny by this statement) is still fulfilling its role of [redacted]. -G.
