On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ============================ Appeal 1935a ============================ >> >> Appellant ais523's Arguments: >> >> Although my judgement is currently correct, it ought not to be. Using the >> appeals process has the potential to delay a remanded or reassigned >> judgement >> until after OVERLOOKED has been fixed. (Note that when appealing my own >> judgement in this way, I believe that I'm skirting around the intention of >> Rule 911; but in my view, it's appropriate to use one scam to fix another.) > > Agoran tradition is to reward valid scams, generally by allowing the > scamster to benefit from eir scam before fixing the bug. In the > interest of rewarding comex, therefore, I believe it would be most > appropriate not to try to "fix" eir scam in this way. > > I therefore intend with the support of Murphy and root to cause the > panel to judge AFFIRM with the preceding paragraph as a concurring > opinion.
I support this. -root
