Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 1611 judged TRUE

Zefram wrote: comex wrote: If there are complications, Zefram did not mention them when calling this CFJ. The only complication is that at the time GreyKnight believed that e could not legally assign a judge to those CFJs. Per CFJ 1604 e was mistaken, but of cou

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 1611 judged TRUE

comex wrote: > If there are complications, Zefram did >not mention them when calling this CFJ. The only complication is that at the time GreyKnight believed that e could not legally assign a judge to those CFJs. Per CFJ 1604 e was mistaken, but of course that judgeme

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 1611 judged TRUE

comex wrote: > I intend to, without objection and with 1 supporter, order GreyKnight > to make a formal apology. (Whether e will do this is questionable.) If e doesn't, e'll end up breaking another rule... and ad infinitum. Maybe under the circumstances the chokey is more just. It will expire