On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:49 PM, comex <com...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I intend to appeal this judgement with two support. >> Arguments: This deserves a REASSIGN under the corruptive self-interest >> clause. > > Granted writing a quick judgment right before the Holiday deadline > extension expired rather than waiting and writing more detailed > reasoning was probably unwise, but I do believe my reasoning about the > 4 day timing is correct,
Except that I explicitly gave a logical and semantic refutation of the exact same reasoning earlier when comex made it. To pass the test of correctness IMO, you (or whomever) would need to demonstrate or explain why my refutation was wrong: http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2008-December/023215.html I even gave a better argument for your judgement of FALSE here: http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2008-December/023219.html Had you reasonably done so I (personally) would not have appealed... I was more bothered by the cursory examination in light of the range of issues that was raised than by any self-interest. -Goethe
