On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Ed Murphy wrote: > Judge Murphy's Arguments: > > I interpret "modify" as limited to changing an existing value, not > initializing an aspect that previously lacked a value. > Isn't this in direct conflict with a judgement about a recent scam failure, where "modify" or a synonym was found to include initialization? Can't remember the details but does this ring a bell with anyone else?
- DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2981 judged TRUE by Murphy Kerim Aydin
