Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1608 assigned to Maud
On 3/28/07, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, this may be trivially true due to Rule 2034. Murphy, Since I was running out of time in which to judge, I had to submit a version of the judgement which did not take into account your argument regarding rule 2034. You may wish to submit a concurring opinion. -- C. Maud Image (Michael Slone) It's your fault, H. Notary! -- Manu, in agora-discussion
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1608 assigned to Maud
Maud wrote: On 3/28/07, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, this may be trivially true due to Rule 2034. If I understand the argument you intend, this would depend on Agorans agreeing not to challenge the vote collector's announcement of results. Yes, that's what I had in mind.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1608 assigned to Maud
Maud wrote: On 3/23/07, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I assign CFJ 1608 to Maud. Text is here: http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2007-January/002784.html I (proto-)judge the statement of CFJ 1608 to be TRUE. Actually, this may be trivially true due to Rule 2034.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 1608 assigned to Maud
On 3/28/07, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, this may be trivially true due to Rule 2034. If I understand the argument you intend, this would depend on Agorans agreeing not to challenge the vote collector's announcement of results. Admittedly, it might seem bizarre for someone to challenge a proposal passed with unanimous consent, but I would not be particularly surprised to see it happen here. If I am misinterpreting which argument you intend, please let me know. -- C. Maud Image (Michael Slone) What an interesting culture we've built! -- Goethe, in agora-discussion
