On 1/18/2020 4:13 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 2:48 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> So this judgement actually extends the concept of physical reality quite a
>> bit, by saying "even though no rule outright forbids this, we're still
>> saying
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 4:14 PM omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 2:48 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > So this judgement actually extends the concept of physical reality quite a
> > bit, by saying "even though no rule outright forbids this, we're still
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 2:48 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> So this judgement actually extends the concept of physical reality quite a
> bit, by saying "even though no rule outright forbids this, we're still
> saying it's R106-prohibited due to our (unwritten) precedents about
On 1/17/2020 9:33 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:
> Judge's Arguments for CFJs 3784 and 3785, as well as the whimsically
> quasi-existent CFJ 3785.5
This is a clever judgement, and covers a lot of the ground well, but
honestly I feel like this is missing something. R106 reads in
Congratulations, this made me chuckle. I’d give you a karma for it, but
unfortunately I’ve already used my notice this week.
Gaelan
> On Jan 17, 2020, at 9:33 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business
> wrote:
>
> Judge's Arguments for CFJs 3784 and 3785, as well as the whimsically
>
5 matches
Mail list logo
