From: To: agora-off Subject: OFF: CFJ 1182 Judged TRUE Date: Thursday, November 25, 1999 2:18 AM ====================================================================== CFJ 1182 All of these Private Orders were improperly executed: * Payment Order PO0018 for 0.1 Indulgence from me to Palnatoke Message-ID: <005601bf2b2b$46d02f20$35d652c3@opus> * t's Order for me to give em one of my Kudos Message-ID: * harvel's Order for me to vacate Payment Order PO0006 for 0.1 Indulgence from em to me Message-Id: <199910311223.HAA21045@msuacad.morehead-st.edu> ====================================================================== Called by: Murphy Judge: t Judgement: TRUE Judge selection: Eligible: t, Wes Not eligible: Caller: Murphy Barred: - Had their turn: Blob, Chuck, Crito, Elysion, harvel, Kolja, Lee, Michael, Murphy, Palnatoke, Peekee Already served: - Defaulted: - By request: Kolja On Hold: elJefe, Steve ====================================================================== History: Called by Murphy: 23 Nov 1999 02:36:50 -0800 Assigned to t: 23 Nov 1999 23:31:03 -0800 Judged TRUE by t: 24 Nov 1999 15:47:19 +0200 Judgement Distributed: As of this message ===================================================================== Caller's Arguments: ====================================================================== Evidence attached by the Caller: ====================================================================== Judge's Arguments: I follow the same logic as in cfj 1172: >>====================================================================== >> CFJ 1172 >> >> The Private Orders issued by Murphy in the message with subject >> "BUS: Agoran Weekly Journal" dated Sun, 31 Oct 1999 were >> improperly executed. >> >>====================================================================== > >Assuming I am still judge of this, I Judge this TRUE. > >R&A: >I am inclined to find private orders to be improper unless there is >positive evidence that they are proper (for example, I might consider >a private order made in accordance with a private agreement to be >proper). Since I have seen no such evidence, I believe the orders >were improper. > >Chuck ======================================================================