On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote: > I intend with 2 Support to appeal this judgement. To postulate an > office doesn't make any sense as taking over the office. In any > event, ais523 held the office and was able to make it postulated by > announcement; it was only Assumed because e became inactive (which was > alluded to in the message). Reading eir statement as anything other > than unambiguously flipping the office to Postulated is unreasonable.
Grat: This makes no sense considering the definition of "postulate".
