If we happen to be amending that rule anyway, could we also replace "inquiry case" with "Call for Judgement"? I know there're several CFJs saying that it works fine as a synonym even though "inquiry case" isn't defined any more, but it confused me to no end the first few times I read the rules and I imagine the same thing happens to other new players as well.
-twg ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 10:25 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote: > Actually, the "cite a relevant existing inquiry case" part needs a > public qualification too. How about moving it up a level: > > Replace: > do one of the following in a timely fashion: > with > do one of the following in a timely fashion, in an announcement > that clearly cites the claim of error: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:01 PM Kerim Aydin ke...@uw.edu wrote: > > > I submit the following proposal, "Denial", AI-3: > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > Amend Rule 2201 (Self-Ratification) by replacing: > > 1. Deny the claim > > with: > > 1. Publicly and clearly deny the claim > > > > [Yeah, a denial should be public] > > > > ----------------------------------
