On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On 11-04-19 02:41 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > If it's considered effective, then I believe it applied to:
> > * reconsideration of CFJs 2990
> > * reconsideration of CFJ 2991 (ineffective because G. published
> > the original intent)
> > unless Roujo's recent batch of conditionals was also effective, in
> > which case it applied to both these things first (both effective).
>
> I favor this (it probably would have made sense to link it with the other two)
> but since I just got assigned a case, I'll additionally note that if not FALSE
> by vagueness, it's probably UNDETERMINED unless someone goes to research
> whether any such actions exist.
Gratuitous note: Murphy's list of intents above were the ones I was aware of
when I posted the message; I re-skimmed afterwards too and these are what I
found. (If Murphy hadn't listed them I was planning to after any CFJ). -G.
