On 8/13/19 11:58 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
I find no fault with the caller's arguments, though I admit I can't see why e
cares one way or the other about the matter. I judge this CFJ TRUE.
-twg
As for why I care:
It came up in an earlier CFJ (3761) about causing an asset to come into
existence.The first judgement argued that if ratification w/o objection
were performed, then the person performing the ratification would have
caused the asset to come into existence. I argued that it didn't count
as the person causing the changes, so the person wasn't causing the
asset to come into existence. The judgement was reconsidered and given a
different resolution, but I felt the question was still valid.
--
Jason Cobb
