On 11/13/23 00:54, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote: > 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 >>
NttPF. -- Janet Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
