Wooble wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2480a >> >> ============================ Appeal 2480a ============================ > > I opine AFFIRM. The incorrect information in the NoVs was the > assertion that each of the named players claimed that there are five > lights.
What's in question is R1504(d), which hinges on whether ais523 could have reasonably believed that R2230 had a loophole. Just because most others didn't believe it, either before or after it was suggested, doesn't mean ais523's belief was necessarily unreasonable.
