On 5/30/08, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I now have 2 Support; I appeal CFJ 1935.
I call for judgement on the statement:
* If I am judged GUILTY in CFJ 1935, a sentence other than DISCHARGE
is appropriate
Arguments:
ais523 claimed that eir "punishment" of revealing my potential scam
makes me eligible to claim R101 (vii):
vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than
once for any single action or inaction.
For obvious reasons I cannot say why, but revealing that particular
idea was indeed a punishment to me. Whether ais523's actions count as
my being "penalized", however, is a different question.
