Re: DIS: Proto-judgements of CFJs 3722-3725

2019-03-09 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Yes, that is in fact exactly what I argue in the judgement to CFJ 3724. :P I expect D. Margaux meant something like "its outcome, _if resolved now_, would be ADOPTED". I imagine e would have resubmitted it with that wording, after realising that the initial wording was wrong, if it hadn't

Re: DIS: Proto-judgements of CFJs 3722-3725

2019-03-09 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 05:30, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > It was not published, twg is simply referring jokingly to emself, as e is > the Assessor. Oh, that makes sense. But I'm confused by D. Margaux's CFJ that 8164's outcome is ADOPTED, if there was no message attempting to resolve the decision.