On 3/5/2019 6:14 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
I respond to the CoE by citing the CFJ.
(I swear I remember there being a proto floating around at some point to
change it so that just the existence of a relevant open CFJ would block
self-ratification, instead of having to go through this rigmarole. Wonder
what happened to that.)
Maybe let a CoE include a connected CFJ, in which case a response might not
be mandatory.
It's already there, no CoE nor any recordkeepor response required(R2201):
A doubt is an explicit public challenge via
[...]
1. An inquiry case
(I would have had to explicitly identify the Report's error in the CFJ,
which I didn't do - sorry about that!)
