Greg Ritter on 10 Jan 2002 12:12:02 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: spoon-discuss: Re: Revision of 236


At 10:25 AM 1/10/2002 +0000, you wrote:

> This is incorrect. If a judge (in a real live court, I mean) refuses to
> hear a case then by definition that refusal means the status quo is maintained.
>
> Likewise, if a court does not come to a decision -- e.g. a hung jury --
> again, the status quo is maintained.

This isn't real life, it's nomic. Establishing a precedent that we can't decide certain things would be useful.

uin.

Huh? How does the second sentence follow from the first sentence?

I agree that deciding we can't decide certain things would be useful. No argument there.

I was responding to Antonio's objection to Prop 236; under that proposal, only True or False judgments can change game custom. He objects that a Refused or Undecided judgment would *not change* the game custom.

My take on it is that the *usefulness* of a Refused or Undecided judgment is that the status quo persists (as in a hung jury or refused case in real courts).

--gritter