I support all intents below. On Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 9:27 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 11/13/23 00:26, nix via agora-business wrote: > > On 10/20/23 16:42, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > >> I self-file a motion to reconsider CFJ 4051, and judge it FALSE. I > thought > >> 67 was the "dream didn't work" number. > > I intend with 5 support to enter this CFJ 4051 into a moot. I intend > > with 6 support to enter CFJ 4051 into a moot (in case enough time passes > > to invalidate the previous). > > > > The conclusion of 4051 *seems* to contradict the conclusions of CFJs > > 4018, 3831, and 3838. The former found a specific scenario where > > radiance and points were equal (a scenario that notably benefited the > > judge that ruled otherwise here), and the latter have found that > > synonyms, from common usage or agoran usage, generally work. > > > > I think a judgment needs to explain why this situation is different than > > the others where synonyms have worked, or else find TRUE. > > > > *sigh* > > I support the above intent for "with 5 support". > > I support the above intent for "with 6 support". > > -- > Janet Cobb > > Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemaso >
