Here's an early product of my historical research. I've collated all
the history annotations from the rulesets that I've found, and resolved
most of the many conflicts between them. The data behind this output
includes rule text too, but I'm concentrating on the history logs to
provide the
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
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
Zefram wrote:
My intent with the motions was to force assignment of judges regardless
of what state the CFJs were in. I'm not at all clear on whether they've
been legally judged.
I understood that intent, and it should work and force a judicial
assignment even after the CotC dismissed the
4 matches
Mail list logo
