Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-23 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, ais523 wrote: > (there's no longer a requirement for offices to report > on when their reports were last ratified; maybe we should add it back, > because it was useful). Also, "ratification date" would report the date that the report was published. E.g. ratifying the 15-

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-23 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, ais523 wrote: > first! This requires "I X and Y" to not be equivalent to "I X, then Y", > but the two have a different meaning in logic, and possibly a different > meaning in standard English. (Note that in "I support and do so", the > support definitely has to come first, s

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-22 Thread ais523
On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:40 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Aris Merchant wrote: > > Um. New guy here. Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. If I'm getting this right > > you're objecting...  > > To something you proposed? That doesn't sound right. I think I'm getting > > confused?  > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-22 Thread Aris Merchant
This is fun, but very complicated. I guess that's why it's fun though. -Aris On Sep 22, 2016 10:41 AM, "Kerim Aydin" > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Aris Merchant wrote: > > Um. New guy here. Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. If I'm getting this > right you're objecting... > > To something y

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-22 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Aris Merchant wrote: > Um. New guy here. Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. If I'm getting this right > you're objecting... > To something you proposed? That doesn't sound right. I think I'm getting > confused? > Or what are you doing? And what doses the "do so mean"? I'm so

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-21 Thread Aris Merchant
Um. New guy here. Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. If I'm getting this right you're objecting... To something you proposed? That doesn't sound right. I think I'm getting confused? Or what are you doing? And what doses the "do so mean"? I'm sorry, I'm probably making some error here. -Aris On Wednes

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3460 assigned to ais523

2016-09-14 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, ais523 wrote: > Thus, the only other option would be a manual > ratification. There was an intent to ratify the list of Patent Titles > on 22 August 2016 (as a response to the problem that this CFJ > mentioned), but as far as I can tell it was never acted upon. As such, > the