On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > omd: unresolvable conditional, default PRESENT > [note: omd's conditional depends on the correctness of the judgement; > given that the judgement reasoning is being remanded, there's no > Agoran-legal reason to conclude any particular correctness for it. A > vote can be conditional on the outcome of the vote – at the risk of > circularity if the vote is close – but the conditional didn't clearly > state how to react to a REMAND outcome.]
So you're saying the correct interpretation of the rules can't be "reasonably determined (without circularity or paradox) from information reasonably available"? If so, how do you intend to judge the case on remand? :P
