On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:53 PM, omd <[email protected]> wrote: > [It would be nice to have an up-to-date players list...] > > I assign CFJ 3407 to scshunt: > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote: >> I CFJ on the following: omd assigned CFJ 3406 using a process >> that, over time, would allow all interested players have a reasonably >> equal opportunity to judge. >> >> I bar omd. >> >> Arguments. >> >> The clause at issue is the last sentence of R991. omd has not >> explicitly stated how e chooses judges, or how e's tracking >> "interested players". I wondered, when I wrote that part of R991, >> whether a breach of this rule (if it happened) could even be >> detected, so this seems like as good a test case for the burden >> of proof on that clause as any. >
Does omd have any arguments on this case? -scshunt
