That’s devious. -o
> On Aug 23, 2017, at 9:15 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > o, you could probably just use quazie's agency to judge your own CFJ. > Unethical but. > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: >> On Aug 23, 2017, at 9:10 PM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: >>> On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 02:03 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: >>>> On Aug 1, 2017, at 8:21 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> I spend an action point, if it is possible for me to do so, to >>>>>> call >>>>>> for judgement on the following statement: >>>>>> >>>>>> Nichdel has 1 Stamp (nichdel) and 9 Shinies. >>>>> >>>>> This is CFJ 3550 and was paid for using AP. I assign it to Quazie. >>>> >>>> If it is possible for me to do so, I withdraw this CFJ. >>> >>> It only appears to be possible if the CFJ has never had a judge. We >>> might want to change that. I can just let the CFJ languish in the >>> oblivion of CFJs that nobody cares about if necessary, until the rules >>> are changed? >> >> Crud. Sorry, Quazie. >> >> As both the caller (myself) and the subject (nichdel) of the CFJ agree on >> the outcome, you can _probably_ quote my arguments and call it a day. The >> results of the event in question have ratified at this point, anyways, >> though of course if you found otherwise then we’d responsibly correct the >> record with all due haste. >> >> -o >> > > > > -- >> From V.J Rada
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
