On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Ed Murphy<emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: > ais523 wrote: > >> Also, why 6466 anyway? I don't get what's so important about that >> proposal. > > Consider what happens when a smart-ass Justiciar assigns ID number > 99999999999999. Just because we haven't had any chaotic ID numbers > yet doesn't mean the concept isn't useful.
Such a number would not be chaotic as the Justiciar would have violated only a SHOULD. -- -c.
