On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Elliott Hird <penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 23 March 2011 13:26, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> There's no compelling reason to consider the actions in the message as not >> occurring simultaneously at the instant it was published (as there might be >> if, for example, it was IMPOSSIBLE for a non-Player to submit a CFJ) > > Does this lack of ordering not contradict established precedence?
Possibly. R478 says the actions occur in the order they appear, so the CFJ was submitted "before" ais523 registered, but at the same "time", in the ordinary language sense. The veracity of the statement is evaluated at the "time" of the statement, and it is TRUE that at 2011-03-20 16:03:29 UTC, ais523 registered.
