I intend, with the consent of Murphy and root, to cause the panel in CFJ 1966b to publish the following:
The panel judges REASSIGN. The judge is instructed to consider whether the rules constitute an "explicit, binding agreement" under Rule 101, and if not, whether a person's privilege of doing what e wilt allows em to ignore Rule 105's claim that it's the only mechanism by which the rules can be changed and change the rules by announcement. Specifically, the judge is asked to rule on whether a person CAN do things e has the privilege of doing, or if e merely MAY do such things, provided they are possible. --Wooble
