On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 03:43, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2107 >> >> ========================= Criminal Case 2107 ========================= >> >> Ivan Hope violated R2149 by making the untruthful statement >> "UNDECIDABLE is never appropriate." >> >> ======================================================================== >> >> Caller: Goethe >> Barred: Ivan Hope >> >> Judge: Wooble >> Judgement: GUILTY >> >> Appeal: 2107a >> Decision: REMAND >> >> Judge: woggle >> Judgement: GUILTY > > I initiate a criminal case against woggle for violating rule 2158 by > judging GUILTY on CFJ 2107. If the previous action fails, then I > intend to do so with two support. Arguments: Apparently, woggle > completely ignored my reason for believing that UNDECIDABLE is never > appropriate, and furthermore, e gave no arguments, suggesting that he > barely even thought about this case before assigning his judgement.
You need 2 support, and I don't think you have much chance (at a GUILTY verdict on me) as I was working under the reasonable assumption that the prior appeals panel had reviewed and rejected those arguments (so at least UNAWARE or EXCUSED should be appropriate). -woggle
