On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:35 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 10:12 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Normally I would like to give ihope the benefit of the doubt, because >> people should not be penalized for stating their opinions about a >> controversy. But it is true that ihope used this statement, >> unqualified, as arguments for a criminal CFJ [1]; e did not even >> bother to defend himself [2]; and now he is threatening the judicial >> system. I intend, with the support of the rest of the panel, to >> REMAND this case, if only to let Judge Wooble pick a better >> punishment. >> >> [1] >> http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2008-July/012744.html >> [2] http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/format.php?cfj=2107 > > I don't see why the fact that I used it as arguments for a criminal > CFJ is relevant. The statement that I didn't bother to defend myself > is patently false, as I did defend myself by stating why UNDECIDABLE > is never appropriate.
True, but when later asked to defend yourself, you replied only with: I've already made some arguments, and having forgotten what this case is all about, I can't make any more at the moment. Anyway, this is immaterial to the facts of the case, serving only to demonstrate somewhat bad faith. I still don't understand why (other situations where UNDECIDABLE might be appropriate aside) "This statement is false" is not UNDECIDABLE. Even if the defendant forgot "logically undecidable" as e claims, that statement is plainly "not capable of being accurately described as either false or true". By the way, I think Appellant Zefram missed the point in CFJ 2086-2087... at the moment that I say "I CFJ on xxx", it is true that I am initiating a CFJ on xxx (and not true at any other time). However, is it then true that CFJ xxx exists? Does it exist while it is being initiated? I would say that, given the analogy with an entity that takes nonzero time to instantiate (say, a database record), the CFJ does not exist while it is being created... but that is a different case.
