On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:19 PM, ais523 <callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Further gratuitous arguments: This is a case of "if X, then ..." where X > is impossible being trivially true. It's different from "if the rules > were somehow modified such that X could come about, then most > likely ...", which is what the judgement addresses.
Gratuitous: CFJ 1895 Further gratuitous: By that argument, what ratification does is completely indeterminate (or was before the "minimally" clause was added; now it just does nothing?).
