On 1/13/12, Eric Stucky <turiski.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> V PSW: V nz n cynlre.
>
> Nethzragf: Nygubhtu pnfr 2062 jnf whqtrq GEHR, n cevznel zbgvingvba sbe gung
> qrpvfvba jnf gung gur nhgube fgngrq vg jnf rapbqrq va n cnegvphyne znaare,
> juvpu guvf zrffntr qbrf abg. (Bs pbhefr, guvf nffhzrf pnfr 3143 vf whqtrq
> GEHR)
>
> I object to every intent declared by 441344.
>
> -Turiski
>
>
>
>
I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {No actions were performed
by announcement due to the first 6 lines of the above-quoted message}
with arguments {Any specification of an action in those lines is
unclear due to, if those lines are an encoded message rather than just
gibberish, the encoding that has been applied to those lines.} and
evidence {Rule 478, the above-quoted message}.
I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {Initiating a CFJ on one's
own playerhood does not reasonably unambiguously indicate intent to
become a player} with arguments {A person might initiate such a CFJ
due to doubt as to whether e had previously registered or as to
whether an attempt by em to deregister had been successful} and
evidence {Rule 869}. I also submit my arguments for this CFJ as
gratuitous arguments for CFJ 3143.
I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {No person registered in
accordance with Rule 869 due to the above-quoted message} with
arguments {Any indication that any person intended to become a player
in the above-quoted message is not reasonably clear due to, if the
first 6 lines of the above-quoted message are an encoded message
rather than just gibberish, the encoding that has been applied to
those lines.} and evidence {Rule 869, the above-quoted message}.
I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {There are currently no
Objectors to any of my declared intents.} with arguments {Turiski was
not a player when e made or attempted to make the above-quoted
objection or attempted objection, and in accordance with Rule 2124
only first-class players can be Objectors to a dependent action(unless
modified by the document authorizing the dependent action, and there
is no such modification).} and evidence {The most recent Census, Rule
2124, Rule 1728, the January 2012 archives of the agora-buisness
mailing list, the results of all CFJs other than this one initiated in
this message}.
I recommend that all of the CFJs initiated in this message should be
judged TRUE. This is not a regulated action.
I declare intent to sit without two objections.
