On 3/25/24 18:10, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 3/16/24 22:08, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> So, a potential point of disagreement here is what *exactly* this
>> standard is requiring. Importantly, I think it's unclear whether the
>> requirement for the "specification of the method
On 3/16/24 22:08, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> So, a potential point of disagreement here is what *exactly* this
> standard is requiring. Importantly, I think it's unclear whether the
> requirement for the "specification of the method" includes a requirement
> for the specification to be
On 3/16/24 14:58, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> One quick thought to add: I suspect one or two people will want to
> reconsider this. If they do, I strongly suggest they come up with
> compelling arguments for why this was missed by every CFJ on Rule 105,
> every Promotor, and every player in 1
On 3/16/24 14:55, nix via agora-business wrote:
> Given that agoran tradition has suggested that this formulation works
> for at least 4 years and perhaps more than a decade, that no previous
> CFJ has raised any concerns about this (despite many CFJs scrutinizing
> Rules 105 and 106), and that "by
4 matches
Mail list logo
