On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> It does, but 2240 only applies to self-contradictory chains of
> precedence/deference clauses within a rule. If a rule simply
> reads "X, but notwithstanding that, Y", then 2240 does not apply,
> and common sense says that Y succeeds in taking
comex wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Proposal 6306 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Murphy
>> Patch objections
>> ...
>> The above notwithstanding, if the action depends on objections,
>> and an objection to it has been withdrawn within the past 24
>>
On Tue, 26 May 2009, comex wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Proposal 6306 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Murphy
>> Patch objections
>> ...
>> The above notwithstanding, if the action depends on objections,
>> and an objection to it has been withdrawn wi
3 matches
Mail list logo
