Proposal 236/3
(Author: Scoff!)
My Gavel Up Your Ass
Create a rule as follows:
{{
_No Judicial Kickbacks_
At the time this proposal is enacted, if there exists a game entity known
as Mike Judge, the Administrator shall replace all instances of the
quote-delimited phrase "Mike Judge" in this rule with a uniquely identifying
name provided by the player Scoff! If the Administrator believes the new name
would substantially alter the effect of this rule in ways other than changing
the name of the entity created, the Administrator may select a name of eir own
choosing. Finally, this paragraph will delete itself from this rule.
There exists an entity known as Mike Judge. Mike Judge is a
non-player entity.
No Call For Judgement may know the identity of the player judging it. Any
Call For Judgement which attempts to identify the player judging it will see
that identity as Mike Judge. Any Call For Judgement which rewards or penalizes
the player judging it will dispense those rewards or penalties to Mike Judge.
The judge assigned to the ruling shall remain the player assigned by the
Administrator.
No Call For Judgement (hereafter referred to as CFJ) may know how the judge
of that CFJ ruled. Any CFJ that attempts to determine how its judge ruled will
see that ruling as "My gavel up your ass. Huh-huh. I said 'Ass'." The actual
ruling on the CFJ shall remain the ruling given by the player assigned to judge
it.
No Call For Judgement may include a statement which refers specifically to
the judge assigned to judge that CFJ, or the judge specifically assigned to
judge any other specific CFJ (where specific CFJ means any qualification that
could refer only to one CFJ. In other words, the CFJ need not be referenced by
serial number, as long as a unique specification is given).
Any CFJ statement which refers specifically to the judge assigned to judge
that CFJ, or the judge specifically assigned to judge any other specific CFJ,
must be judged "Refused" or "Undecided", else the ruling judge will be added
permanently to the List of Misbehaving Judges, and may not be removed from the
List of Misbehaving Judges except in the event of a Win. This rule supersedes
rule 209.
At the time of the passage of this proposal, any CFJ judged in the past 10
ndays that referred specifically to the judge assigned to judge that CFJ, or the
judge specifically assigned to judge any other specific CFJ, will have its
ruling summarily changed to REFUSED. This paragraph will then delete itself from
this rule.
}}
Then modify Rule 128/2, replacing the text
{{A Judge's decision shall
have the force of law.}}
with the following text:
{{
Judges may revise their ruling within one nday of the first posting
of that ruling in a public forum, after which time all rulings are final (except
where revision is explicitly provided for in the case of a Call For Judicial
Review or a Proposal to Overturn).
Calls For Judgement are intended to guide interpretation of the
ruleset. All judgements must be in accordance with the rules in effect at
the time of judgement. Where the interpretation of the rules is
unclear, or the rules are silent or inconsistent concerning the issue being
judged, judges may consider judicial precedent, prior game custom, common sense,
the spirit of the game, and the best interests of the game.
CFJ Statements do not have the force of law. CFJ Statements whose
most recent revisions are ruled "True" or "False" are regarded, with their
associated rulings, as explicit statements of current game custom. At no
time does a CFJ Statement, even when ruled "True", become or create a
rule. Rulings of "Undecided" or "Refused" and their associated statements
have no force of law or custom. Only the most recent revision number of a
CFJ statement is ever regarded as a statement of game custom.
The judge's analysis and any other text apart from the ruling itself shall
have neither force of law nor authority as statements of game custom, but will
be archived by the administrator as a reference to judicial precedent for future
judges.
In any event of conflict between the rules and a CFJ statement, the rules
shall in all circumstances supersede a CFJ statement, including CFJ statements
which directly claim to supersede this or any other rule. All rules supersede
all CFJ statements, regardless of their respective serial numbers.
CFJs must not directly create, alter, or remove rules. CFJs may not
directly protect rules from alteration or removal from the ruleset.
However, the indirect effect of the ruling on a CFJ may require alterations to
the rule set or game state, to bring them in accordance with the judgement.
}}
Then add a rule:
_Judicial Rear View_
{{
I. Judicial Review
If at any time a player believes that changes to the rules have invalidated
the prior ruling on a Call For Judgement (hereafter CFJ) statement, that player
may post a Call For Judicial Review in a public forum. The Call For Judicial
Review (hereafter CFJR) must name the serial number of the CFJ to be reviewed,
and the player requesting the CFJR.
The player who originally judged the statement, even if playing under a
different name, shall be assigned to review the statement and issue a new ruling
considering current law from the current ruleset, current game custom, and
recent judicial precedents. If the original judge is On Leave or no longer
an active player, the Administrator shall select a new judge in the same manner
prescribed in rule 127 for selection of judges for Calls For Judgement, with the
additional stipulation that the player issuing the CFJR is not eligible to
judge.
The Judge shall, within seven days of eir selection, give one of the
following responses to the Call for Judicial Review to which e was assigned,
accompanied by analysis:
1. True: The Statement is true.
2. False: The Statement is false.
3. Undecided: It cannot be determined at the time of the Judgment whether
the Statement is true or false.
The Judge's ruling shall be created as a new revision of the original CFJ,
under the same serial number. Judges may revise their ruling on the CFJR
within one nday of the first posting of that ruling in a public forum, after
which time all rulings are final.
II. Appeal / Overturning a CFJ
At any time within 7 ndays following the posting of a Judgement of "True"
or "False" on a CFJ or CFJR, any player may propose that the Judgement be
overruled by posting an Appeal to Overturn in a public forum. If
limitations on the number of proposals per nweek are in effect, Appeals to
Overturn will not count against a player's proposal limit. The Appeal to
Overturn will be placed on the next available ballot as a proposal. If the
proposal is adopted, the ruling on the CFJ or CFJR will be changed to
"Undecided" by creating a new revision of the CFJ with the "Undecided"
ruling.
}}
I change my name to "Uncle Psychosis". Indeed. (I
don't imagine this will require any more work for the admin, assuming he
doesn't apply the previous change before he sees this one).
uin.
DISCLAIMER:
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the
intended recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information
which is privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning
of applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised
that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
contact the sender of this message as soon as possible.
The views or opinions expressed in this message
are those of the author and may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup
Limited