[Nero Germanicus]

I would characterze it as thorough for a state election board ruling but not nearly as thorough as court rulings tend to be.
There were several Illinois Election Board challenges to Obama:
Freeman v Obama
Jackson v Obama
Martin v Obama
The Cruz ruling was not substantially different with regard to thoroughness.

But if you compare those to, say, the Mississippi eligibility challenge that was heard in federal court by U.S. District Court Judge Henry T. Wingate, the judge wrote an 85 page opinion.

[Cboldt]

-- I would characterze it as thorough for a state election board ruling but not nearly as thorough as court rulings tend to be. --

Do you reach that point of view on word or page count? I have an opinion of the ruling, based on its content, but rather than disclose my point of view, I'd like to find out how you distinguish between a "thorough" consideration of the argument, and a perfunctory one.