==============================  CFJ 2988  ==============================

    Walker has more than 0 points.

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

Caller:                                 Walker

Judge:                                  Murphy
Judgement:                              FALSE

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

History:

Called by Walker:                       11 Apr 2011 20:21:06 GMT
Assigned to Murphy:                     15 Apr 2011 22:10:02 GMT
Judged FALSE by Murphy:                 15 Apr 2011 22:33:13 GMT

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

Caller's Arguments:

I think that this is FALSE, FALSE and TRUE respectively.

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

Caller's Evidence:

from the recent voting results:

*6985  1.0  Walker      no equity cases
*6989  2.0  Wooble      Bring Back Points
*6991  1.0  omd         Hey, I was using that

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

Judge Murphy's Arguments:

Again, multiple events in the same message occur in order when that
order is unambiguous, so 2988 and 2990 are straightforward.  As for
2989, I believe precedent is that a new rule clause reacting to the
adoption of proposals does not react to the adoption of the proposal
that enacted it.

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