On 9/13/2020 3:41 AM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
On 9/6/20 6:47 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
On 8/30/2020 2:41 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
The below CFJ is 3880. I assign it to ATMunn.
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3880
=============================== CFJ 3880
===============================
This is a CFJ.
==========================================================================
Caller: Trigon
Judge: ATMunn
==========================================================================
History:
Called by Trigon: 25 Aug 2020 20:29:58
Assigned to ATMunn: [now]
==========================================================================
Alleged calling message:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-August/044696.html
Arbitor's Note:
If a judge finds that eir assigned CFJ is not a CFJ, common practice
is to
leave it in the archives with its initial ID number (along with the not-
judgement) and not reassign the ID#, so it can be used as a handy
reference
for any follow-up CFJs that might be called on the matter.
==========================================================================
Judge's Arguments:
The only relevant piece of the rules here is the first paragraph of Rule
991:
Any person (the initiator) can initiate a Call for Judgement (CFJ,
syn. Judicial Case), specifying a statement to be inquired into by
announcement.
It seems reasonable to interpret the statement of "This is a CFJ" as
meaning "I initiate a CFJ with the statement 'This is a CFJ'". We allow
the format "CFJ: blah", and this is not that far off from that.
I judge CFJ 3880 TRUE.
[I could certainly see the arguments for FALSE as well, but I don't have
much time and it doesn't really matter much anyway. If anyone is
strongly opposed, file a Motion, but I don't think anyone will care that
much.]
Agora why are you like this?
no u
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary :)
