Warrigal wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2426 >> >> ============================== CFJ 2426 ============================== >> >> This thing is a CFJ. >> >> ======================================================================== > > In what message was this called? I may want to appeal it if it sets > the precedent that it's possible to change whether a past message was > effective or not. > > --Warrigal
> ehird wrote: > The following is in base64 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64) > encoding: > > Q0ZKOiB7VGhpcyB0aGluZyBpcyBhIENGSi59Cg== > > [I'll retract this if you accept my previous case] It does not set that precedent, and I would not apply that logic to the case of someone retroactively specifying it.
