Apologies for the triple-post, but CB could have just expressed disinterest in the darn thing.
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:01 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > This message is just for the convenience of those not caught up, as I > was not. > > Oh dear God just read the full mess. CB (this is a valid nickname, don't > even think about it) submitted a message *pledging* not to submit > judgement. Gaelan then attempted to ratify a document stating that 3509 > was judgeless, which was objected to by o. The player also known as > CuddleBeam who I shall now refer to as UberJeff submitted a clearly > incorrect Judgement of DISMISS, based on the fact that he couldn't be > bothered to read the rules. Your message states that UberJeff moved for > reconsideration, but actually Publius moved for it, which UberJeff > supported. UberJeff then went back to eir original stance of not submitting > one. > > It is clear that UberJeff broke eir pledge not to judge the judgement. > It is also clear that, as UberJeff emself admits, their original judgement > is > clearly wrong. UberJeff should be carded, the initial judgement should be > counted as authoritative, weshould moot that judgement and give the CFJ > to a different judge. > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:41 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is it legal to move for you to reconsider your own judgement and then not >> judge it? I feel like this should be counted as a refusal to reconsider and >> we should thus count the original judgement (and Moot it if necessary). >> >> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 5:47 AM, CuddleBeam <cuddleb...@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm not going to give Judgement on that, because while I am honestly >>> able to give Judgement (and would Judge TRUE, because I agree with Gaelan), >>> I won't engage in tit for tat and cards for cards because I believe it's >>> wrong, even if our Justice system commands me to. >>> >> >> >
