On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:55 PM, John Smith wrote:
> CfJ:The second NoV quoted below is not valid
>
> Arguments: According to Rule 2230, "A NoV is valid if and only if... no
> previous valid NoV specified substantially identical information (i.e. the
> same violation for the same specific act)."
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Warrigal wrote:
> > I publish an NoV, where the Accused is Sgeo, the allegedly illegal
> > action is when coppro changed eir nickname to "The Robot", the rule
> > allegedly broken is Rule 2215, and the power of the rule
2 matches
Mail list logo
