On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Elliott Hird wrote: > 2009/2/27 Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>: >> >> As pointed out, the previous NoV was not in fact an NoV. >> >> Notice of Violation: >> Actor: ehird. >> Action: Failure to publish a an apology explaining eir error, shame, >> remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement, ASAP after >> being sentenced to GUILTY/APOLOGY in CFJ 2347. >> Rule violated: 1504 >> Crime: Class-3 Crime of Failure to Apologize (R1504). > > Is this not also invalid per R2239?
Probably. Is failure to publish something instantaneous upon the time limit expiring or continuous? I'll let you call that CFJ. This is why I meant to vote against this one, I blame myself. EVERYONE: any crimes you committed prior to 21 Feb 2009 are un-NOV-able in a way that spawns CFJs (I meant to commit a rather vile crime myself just to prove the complete and utter idiocy of R2239). The worst part is that it invalidates NoVs instead of just making DISCHARGE the default sentence for grandfathered crimes - therefore we now have to deal with the messiness of a separate CFJ process on invalidity rather than just proceeding to NOT GUILTY or DISCHARGE. Well, at least Murphy who proposed this is the one stuck with the work. -G.
