On 12/10/07, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh yikes, I just realized, that by my own logic, the "above" as a
> whole was actually two valid votes (though the second one might not be
> counted, it's still a valid ballot). The way the CFJ statement is
> phrased implies "exactly one" not "at least one", so I think my
> argument requires a FALSE. I intend to appeal this judgement with
> two support, recommending a REMAND with the trivial task of matching
> judgement with argument. -Goethe
Worth considering is the fact that someone without a flash player
would never see the SUPPORT part.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
