Are the case statements available somewhere so that I can easily look over them for annotations?
On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 at 13:40, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > 3614* Assigned to o (due Fri, 15 Dec 2017 ~23:51:00) > > > If I am assigned to this case (unclear to me): > > > I judge TRUE. But only in a very limited sense - for example, if two > > > contracts perform a "handshake" that one contract authorizes starting > > > an auction in another contract that permits such authorization. > However, > > > rules-auctions (for example) are restricted and so couldn't be so > > > authorized without the rule defining the auction explicitly permitting > > > it. > > > > If this case remains unjudged, then I recuse o and assign it to G. > > If the above sentence assigned the case to me, I judge it as quoted above. > > > > > > 3615* Assigned to o (due Fri, 15 Dec 2017 ~23:51:00) > > > If I am assigned to this case: > > > I judge this FALSE. Zombie Auctions are the counterexample (higher > > > power overrules this clause) and there aren't other types of auctions > > > to consider. > > > > If this case remains unjudged, then I recuse o and assign it to G. > > If the above sentence assigned the case to me, I judge it as quoted above. > > > > > > 3616* Assigned to Telnaior (due Fri, 15 Dec 2017 ~23:52:39) > > > If I'm assigned to this case: > > > I judge it IRRELEVANT. Too much work for now-gone gamestate > > > reconstruction. > > > > If this case remains unjudged, then I recuse Telnaior and assign it > > to G. > > If the above sentence assigned the case to me, I judge it as quoted above. > > > > > > 3618* Assigned to ATMunn (due Fri, 15 Dec 2017 ~23:55:35) > > > If I'm assigned to this case, I judge this case TRUE. R2034 is weird by > > > ratifying information not actually contained in the document that > > > ratifies (when adoption and taking effect are uncoupled). Causes weird > > > effects. > > > > If this case remains unjudged, then I recuse ATMunn and assign it to G. > > If the above sentence assigned the case to me, I judge it as quoted above. > > > >
