On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, comex wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> As the caller suggests, it is clear from R2193 and the first paragraph >>> of R2192 that the Monster fits the intensional definition. I >>> therefore assign a judgement of TRUE to CFJ 2172. >> >> I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 support. >> Arguments: >> See CFJ 1746. > > I support this. -Goethe
With the support of comex and Goethe, I appeal CFJ 2172.
