Ed Murphy wrote:
> pikhq initiated a criminal case in
> Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I thought it was rather unclear, and possibly thereby ineffective,
but not for your reason. I thought that the identification of the
defendant was clear, but the rule allegedly breached and particularly
the action allegedly breaching it were not explicitly flagged. Still,
I've recorded it as a CFJ with these parameters:
Type: criminal case
Defendant: Zefram
Rule: 106
Action: distributing proposal 5269 without a submission to the proposal
pool
I was about to notify myself of the case, but perhaps I'll hold off if
we can get a quick consensus on your interdiction.
-zefram
