Pavitra wrote:
Sean Hunt wrote:
Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
appropriate based upon my previous comments.
BobTHJ
You now have two appeals going. Yay.
-coppro
No, the first one fizzled.
R1504, last paragraph, second sentence "Unless otherwi
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> I could find no criminal CFJs against officers for late reports during
> their first week in the archive.
By the way, with this low sample size, if there are NoVs that were closed
without going to criminal trial (either contested or mea culpas) those
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> However, there were 2 cases (CFJ 2348, CFJ 2379) where the holder of a
> low-priority office was accused of failing to report during eir first
> month in the office; both resulted in SILENCE. The firs
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Here, there's a consensus is no dinging at less than 4 days, dinging
> after 7 days, but there's probably very few/no cases raised one way or
> the other in the 5-7 day range. The question is, is this because we
> don't punish, or because office
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:49, comex wrote:
>> You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom doesn't
>> apply when the officer has "most of" a week (+ the election period) to
>> prepare a report, but neither of us has evidence. If you giv
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:49, comex wrote:
> You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom doesn't
> apply when the officer has "most of" a week (+ the election period) to
> prepare a report, but neither of us has evidence. If you give some, I think
> it would help your case.
>
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 9, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal this case. By custom Agora has permitted new officers a full
ASAP period to fulfill outstanding obligations.
You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom
doesn't apply when the officer has
Sean Hunt wrote:
> Roger Hicks wrote:
>> I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
>> appropriate based upon my previous comments.
>>
>> BobTHJ
>
> You now have two appeals going. Yay.
>
> -coppro
No, the first one fizzled.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signatu
Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
appropriate based upon my previous comments.
BobTHJ
You now have two appeals going. Yay.
-coppro
Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 16:43, Charles Reiss wrote:
>> On 9/5/09 8:09 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2674
>>>
>>> == �Criminal Case 2674 (Interest Index = 2) �===
>>>
>>> � � BobTHJ violated Rule 2143,
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 16:43, Charles Reiss wrote:
>> On 9/5/09 8:09 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2674
>>>
>>> == Criminal Case 2674 (Interest Index = 2) ===
>>>
>>>
11 matches
Mail list logo
