Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-11 Thread VJ Rada
I agree with Ørjan, "a clear designation of intent" clearly only applies to emails sent to all players, and you misquoted it. It's "clear designation of intent TO BE PUBLIC". On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: >> While the rules do not specifically

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-11 Thread Ørjan Johansen
While the rules do not specifically define “an announcement of intent”, rule 478 (“Fora”) defines what it means to announce something: A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be public. A rule can also

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-11 Thread Gaelan Steele
afterthought, which was why it was in a >> separate email. I did the win attempt, then realized I had a scam that I >> could use to get a black ribbon, so I did so. > > Thanks for the explanation. > > By the way, your spam filter is leaking: > >> Subject: Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 >> assigned to o > > -o >

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-11 Thread Owen Jacobson
planation. By the way, your spam filter is leaking: > Subject: Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 > assigned to o -o signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-10 Thread Gaelan Steele
Mostly a happy accident, I guess. I don’t think there’s much of a benefit to sneakily doing other actions; I guess if I had a grudge against G. I could make a sneaky CFJ then go “HAHAHAHA YOU FAILED TO ASSIGN,” but even that doesn’t directly benefit me (I guess if he ended up with a red card

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-10 Thread Owen Jacobson
> On Oct 11, 2017, at 1:43 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > That was quite the emotional roller coaster, though I’ll admit I’m not that > surprised. On the bright side, we’ve got a precedent for this sort of issues, > and I’m not cardable for incorrect ratification. Since

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3572 assigned to o

2017-10-10 Thread Gaelan Steele
That was quite the emotional roller coaster, though I’ll admit I’m not that surprised. On the bright side, we’ve got a precedent for this sort of issues, and I’m not cardable for incorrect ratification. Gaelan > On Oct 10, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > On Sun,