ais523 may want to appeal CFJ 3585 then, as a matter of principle.
To quote Judge V.J. Rada: > The text of the rules (2168) say that PSS was obligated to "issue a > humiliating public reminder to the slackers who have not yet cast any > votes on it despite being eligible". PSS literally used the words > "humiliating public reminder", addressing all those who have not > voted. Uninspired, but nothing in the rules demands any more than > that, and it would be atextual to read in a creativity or specific > address requirement. This CFJ is TRUE. (of course, the new 'name and shame' rule makes this irrelevant going forward). On Mon, 6 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > How could I make it more humiliating without being rude. > > On 11/06/2017 05:53 AM, Alex Smith wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 05:51 -0500, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > wrote: > >> I issue a humiliating public reminder for this proposal and extend > >> the voting period by 7 days. > > ISIDTID. That may well be a public reminder (purely based on its form), > > but it's not particularly humiliating, and stating that it's > > humiliating is just a false statement. > > > > -- > ---- > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > >
