DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement, CFJ 3343

2013-07-07 Thread Jonathan Rouillard
AFAIK, doing so is illegal, since Elders can still object to the intent. ~ Roujo On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 02:50 +0100, Charles Walker wrote: >> On 3 July 2013 19:21, Sean Hunt wrote: >> > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: >> >> 33

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement, CFJ 3343

2013-07-03 Thread Sean Hunt
Got to wait 4 days... On Jul 3, 2013 9:56 PM, "Alex Smith" wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 02:50 +0100, Charles Walker wrote: > > On 3 July 2013 19:21, Sean Hunt wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ed Murphy > wrote: > > >> 3343: FALSE > > >> > > >> If any party's constitution actually

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement, CFJ 3343

2013-07-03 Thread Ørjan Johansen
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote: On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: 3343: FALSE If any party's constitution actually authorized party members to act on its behalf, then such an inference would be valid. However, no party's constitution currently does so. I intend to app

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement, CFJ 3343

2013-07-03 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote: > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > > 3343: FALSE > > > > If any party's constitution actually authorized party members to act on > > its behalf, then such an inference would be valid. However, no party's > > constitution currently does so.