Originally Posted by IVC
Could you please clarify in what way it was deficient?
As I mentioned earlier, when FGG shows up, the battle of egos starts raging from all sides. While there is an undeniable entertainment value in it, the informative value tends to go down with all "oh, yeah, tell me this" and "are you saying that."
Most of us are just trying to figure out what the status is and whether there are any serious procedural issues that can lead to long delays. Anything else that we can learn about the process is a pure bonus.
If you read rule 5.1 you will see exactly two requirements for notice (not including time and manner of delivery):
1. The notice must state the constitutional question raised and;
2. The notice must identify the paper that raises it.
If you carefully examine the notice linked to in the OP, as sent by certified mail, you will see that it fails to meet the second requirement.
As an aside, I'm not sure what all the chest thumping around here is about, it seems clear to me that we are all on the same side.