On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:41 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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.
I support this. -root
