On 11 April 2011 22:12, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Charles Walker wrote: >> On 11 April 2011 21:30, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Charles Walker wrote: >> >> I think that this is FALSE, FALSE and TRUE respectively. >> > >> > Pretty standard interpretation; any reason this *wouldn't* be >> > the case? -G. >> >> Well, this is Agora. Someone was bound to wait until there was a >> Scorekeepor report and then CFJ it, so I thought I'd get in there >> first. > > Sure, no harm in defensive recordkeeping. > > For a statement like this when there's a pretty strong direction, > a single CFJ "Walker has 0 points, Wooble has 0 points, and omd has > more than 0 points" would usually do. If a judge finds FALSE, e can put > the false part in the arguments, and we're pretty good at letting that > stand as precedent without needing to re-call for every permutation.
Thanks, I will note that for future cases. -- Charles Walker
