Re: [spoon-discuss] style and order

[Zarpint <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No- my prop explicitly made all eligible players AJs for outstanding CFJs.
It just wasn't part of the rule.

Zarpint


-- 
Zarpint Jeremy Cook    "All thy toiling only breeds new dreams, new dreams;
mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx         there is no truth saving in thine own heart."
dynamicwind.com               --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, [iso-8859-1] Bill Adlam wrote:

> Zarpint wrote:
>
> > - We are all eligible to judge some CFIs after my Upper House reform
> > prop last nweek, but Dave hasn't posted a list,
>
> We're only eligible to judge those that have been referred to the Upper
> House since the start of this nweek.  Rule 128 says that Appelate
> Judges are assigned _when_ a CFI is assigned to the Upper House.  It
> doesn't say that players who enter the Upper House subsequently can
> later become AJs.
>
> Sagitta, being pedantic as usual
>
>
>

>
> ___________________________________________________________
> WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Yahoo! Mail Internet Cafe Awards  www.yahoo.co.uk/internetcafes
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss