DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1806: assign Zefram

2007-11-30 Thread Zefram
Ed Murphy wrote: >Judge Zefram's reasoning is sound, but as of the adoption of Proposal >5296, the appropriate judgement resulting from such reasoning is >UNDETERMINED rather than UNDECIDABLE. D'oh. -zefram

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1806: assign Zefram

2007-11-29 Thread Ed Murphy
pikhq wrote: (besides, such a claim would be bullshit: this isn't a question on a rule-defined action) I was actually going to CFJ with an argument that perhaps it was, except that it's moot due to the UNDECIDABLE vs. UNDETERMINED fix.