> On Sep 19, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > H. Secretary o, > > You called CFJ 3550, but after it was assigned a judge you attempted > to retract it (retraction failed as it had a judge). Is a judgement > still needed/relevant? If so, I'll reassign for a (hopefully) > appropriate judgement; if not, I'll reassign to myself and judge it > IRRELEVANT.
Judgement is no longer needed and is not relevant. All parties agree on the outcome, and in any case, any possible defects in their collective reasoning have long since been squashed by the portion of the Secretary’s report that enumerates Shinies, which self-ratifies via rule 2166 (the portion of a recordkeepor’s report that lists instances of an asset is self-ratifying) and rule 2483 (the Secretary is the recordkeepor of shinies). -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
