JAG
Top 20
Correct and my left nut is savedI’ve read, re-read, and read again that word-salad abomination of an announcement.
It’s almost like someone threw some duck entrails at google translate and this is what popped out the end. FMD.
Caution: What follows is a madman’s reverse-engineered interpretation of said word salad. Read at your own risk.
Now that’s out of the way, I think I can see AVZ painting a positive picture here:
Thing 1. Z/ICC Arbitration: The next action is for the ICC to determine whether it has *jurisdiction* to hear the case. AVZ think the ICC does not have jurisdiction and, if correct, the case will not proceed to the next step (of “being heard on its merits”).
Thing 2. DRC Tribunal: AVZ are seemingly so confident on this one they did not even send the office coffee boy to stand in the corner of the hearing room and play pocket billiards for a few hours. What the shit, Batman? Either that or they were binge-watching Doomsday Preppers and forgot to put the alarm on - dunno which.
Anyhoo, AVZ are saying “we don’t give a fuck - it’s not a properly constituted arbitral tribunal”, presumably because the dispute mechanisms are laid out in detail in other legal documents (JV agreement or somesuch thing). In other words, “until such time as one of these numbnuts from Dathomir invokes a proper dispute with us, it’s ours thanks all the same”.
So yeah, I think it’s positive. If correct, it might explain the vibe about being close to the ML, but who the fuck knows…
Oh, and to AVZ management: Hi. I hereby volunteer to write your announcements from this point forward. I’ll write some nice words that are both syntactically correct and logically structured. Then I’ll hand it over Wino and Moneybags who will add the kind of verbs and adjectives that would make a soldier blush. These announcements, so authored, will then be both understandable and entertaining. You know it makes sense.
Thing 1. Z/ICC Arbitration: The next action is for the ICC to determine whether it has *jurisdiction* to hear the case. AVZ think the ICC does not have jurisdiction and, if correct, the case will not proceed to the next step (of “being heard on its merits”).