On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Alex Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 Support. CFJ 2471 is >> trivially true, as I am currently a player and it is after I sent that >> message. I believe I didn't CFJ on what I wanted to. > > I interpreted "after" as "due to", but I should be more alert really, I > missed that interpretation.
N.B. whether Quazie is a player now is irrelevant, but e unambiguously became a player before submitting eir CFJs.
