On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ========================= Criminal Case 2181 ========================= >> >> root broke Rule 2170 by making the statement "I am comex.". > > Lacking any other argument, I find root UNIMPUGNED. I see no reason to > believe that root intended anyone to be mislead by eir (public) > statement. It's pretty clear to me that it's a (failed) attempt to > test Rule 2170.
Y'know, root, my claim to be you [1] has self-ratified. You could now resolve your attempt to initiate a criminal case against me for making that claim. (Unfortunately, this is made somewhat pointless by the fact that, before the self-ratification, root [or anyone] could achieve exactly the same effect by supporting the attempt and initiating the case as a supporter; oh well.) [1] http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2008-September/013778.html
