Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=3104

==============================  CFJ 3104  ==============================

    G. became a player as a result of ais523's message quoted in
    evidence.

========================================================================

Caller:                                 Murphy

Judge:                                  scshunt
Judgement:                              FALSE

========================================================================

History:

Called by Murphy:                       19 Oct 2011 04:44:15 GMT
Assigned to scshunt:                    21 Oct 2011 03:34:11 GMT
Judged FALSE by scshunt:                21 Oct 2011 18:42:49 GMT

========================================================================

Caller's Arguments:

G.'s message probably sufficed to trigger Rule 869, but I
don't remember whether there's precedent for this particular form (if
there is, then I'll retract these cases).

========================================================================

Caller's Evidence:

ais523 wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 15:51 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> I CFJ on the following statement:   
>> I intend to become a player at this time.
>> I retract the above CFJ.
> 
> I support and do so.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by G.:

CFJ 2979 says the that nesting a registration message in a
CFJ statement *doesn't* work but CFJ 2980 says that adding "I do so"
does the trick.  I'm wondering if retracting the CFJ leaves the statement 
behind or is just additional confirmation of nullification.

========================================================================

Judge scshunt's Arguments:

G.'s intent did not specify the method of dependent action that he intended to
use.

========================================================================