Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2993 assigned to omd

2011-04-26 Thread Ed Murphy
omd wrote: >> I support and do so. > > You can't; the judgement was made more than seven days ago. Bah, I misremembered this time limit as being two weeks, same as calling for appeal. Some of my other recent actions may have been similarly ineffective, then; will go through and check later. (I

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2993 assigned to omd

2011-04-26 Thread omd
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > omd wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Elliott Hird >> wrote: >>> On 17 April 2011 04:29, omd wrote: Oh, fine. Â I judge TRUE. >>> >>> I intend to Motion to Reconsider with two support with the argument: >>> "The fact that G. d

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2993 assigned to omd

2011-04-19 Thread Elliott Hird
On 19 April 2011 20:42, Elliott Hird wrote: > Apparently there is an already-existing intent (though I haven't seen > one). Care to support that instead? Disregard this, thought it was a different CFJ.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2993 assigned to omd

2011-04-19 Thread Elliott Hird
On 19 April 2011 20:25, omd wrote: >> I intend to Motion to Reconsider with two support with the argument: >> "The fact that G. doesn't know that about omd does not negate the >> validity and rule-abiding argument he made." > > I support. Apparently there is an already-existing intent (though I h