On Mon, 14 May 2012, omd wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:06 AM, ais523 <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 02:03 -0400, omd wrote: > >> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Alex Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I judge CFJ 3190 NOT GUILTY (1504(a)). Arguably, also (d), but (a) is > >> > more clearcut. > >> > >> I intend, with two support, to make this case Notable. > > > > I support. (What sort of annotation are you planning?) > > That selecting a confusing nickname need not be for oneself, but a > nickname is only "selected" if it sticks (is likely to stick?). (I > personally disagree with both of these, but not enough to try to > appeal.)
If you annotate this, Steve has written a better/clearer version - better worded and on more solid ground IIRC, with some specific limitations on choosing others' nicknames depending on context. I'd give chapter and verse but CotC site seems to be unresponsive this morning (search for "Beverly" in statement or argument text if you can reach the site). -G.
