On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>> This is an awful judgement. Then again, I don't think your Servant
>> Coin was ever removed, so...
>
> Why? I'm biased, and one can always go into excessive detail in a judgement,
> but the caller's arguments were generally clear enough that at least a few
> people (including yourself) said "yep, looks like it works" at the time...
Yes, but more issues have since come up. As ais523 said in eir judgement:
{
So the question here is whether (as in ehird's attempted paradox)
intending an action creates a deadline for objection, or whether (as in
Goethe's and my/comex's scam attempt) doing a dependent action creates a
deadline for intending it, or both.
}
First, if the former is true, then objections need not be done until
the end of the Holiday, causing some ambiguity. Although the rule is
not phrased in a way that would seem to create a deadline-- in fact,
it's possible to object after the fact-- the deadline for objecting
is, practically, more of an actual deadline than any of these other
deadlines being discussed.
Second, it ought to be addressed whether the deadline for intention is
the time of acting or four days before that time.
