Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3488 judged TRUE

I believe it dealt with partnerships - there were some odd times around that. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 17:32 Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > In my dim memory, there was at least once where someone judging a CFJ > made em not the judge of said CFJ. > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Publius

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3488 judged TRUE

In my dim memory, there was at least once where someone judging a CFJ made em not the judge of said CFJ. On Fri, 19 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > Now that I reread it again I see why you got that idea, I should have been > more clear. Your interpretation is definitely