D. Margaux wrote:
> Fair enough. This is CFJ 3678. I assign it to Murphy.
(in response to a long email chain that I won't reproduce here)

D. Margaux wrote:
> I CFJ barring twg: “If in the last 48 hours the Speaker has objected to any
> announced intents to Demand Resignation, then Agora is not satisfied with 
> those
> intents and an attempt to Demand Resignation would be INEFFECTIVE.”
>
> I CFJ barring twg: “A player CAN object more than once to a dependent action 
> if
> e has not ever withdrawn an objection to that dependent action.”
>
> These are CFJs 3679 and 3680. I assign them to G.
>
> For what it’s worth, I think they are, in order, FALSE (for reasons twg gave)
> and TRUE (for reasons I gave).

G. attempted to judge these "CFJ 3679" and "CFJ 3680" on November 2.


D. Margaux wrote:
>> On Oct 31, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote:
>>
>> I CFJ: "Gaelan transferred a coin to me today."
>
> This is CFJ 3678. I assign it to Murphy.
>
>
>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 5:45 PM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I CFJ on the following statement: "VJ Rada violated No Faking in the below
>> quoted message."
>
> This is CFJ 3679. I assign it to Trigon.
>
>
>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 5:52 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote:
>>
>> And I CFJ (linked with the below, please): "V.J. Rada committed the crime of
>> Oathbreaking in eir below-quoted message." Might as well cover all possible
>> bases.
>
> This is CFJ 3680. I assign to Trigon.

Trigon attempted to judge these "CFJ 3679" and "CFJ 3680" on November 3.

I believe that all the CFJs exist, have judges, and both G.'s and Trigon's 
attempts to assign judgements were EFFECTIVE (CFJ 1692-3), but it's going to be 
hellish for recordkeepors to try to deal with.

There are also two different CFJ 3678s assigned to Murphy, which I predict will 
result in a sitcom-like mix-up.

Since CFJ IDs are unregulated, we _can_ just collectively decide to start 
calling the CFJs something else, but that will be confusing for later 
archivists depending on what we choose. My preferred solution is to call the 
first set "CFJ 3678a-3680a" and the second set "CFJ 3678b-3680b", which at 
least preserves the numbers so that they can be searched on. Any other ideas?

-twg

Reply via email to