On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I intend, with support, to publish the following NoV (I admit this >> one's a bit iffy): root violated Power=1 R2215 by making the statement >> "Admitted.", intended to mislead others as to its effectiveness. This >> admission was not very effective as its self-ratification lasted only >> a few hours before being reversed. >> answers.com defines 'effective' as 'Having an intended or expected >> effect.', and while this may have had the intended effect, it sure >> didn't have the expected one. > > Publishing a revision to a document in response to a claim of error is > not an action and has no effect at all, other than to satisfy the > requirement to publish it. In this regard it absolutely had its > expected effect.
In fact, it should be pointed out that the rules *required* me to respond to the CoE in this way. I don't see that R2215 required me in any way to be extra verbose about it. -root