Re: [s-d] Judgement draft

[Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 25 Nov 2006, at 00:25, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:

> Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> ===Accepting RFJs===
>> The selected Judge shall as a Game Action accept eir assigned RFJ by
>> changing it's state to Accepted.
>
> The "shall" here implies to me that the accepting is required.
>
> And it's "its", not "it's" here.

Yes it's required. You can't bog down justice by deliberately not  
accepting an assigned RFJ, you will step down from it or accept it,  
you can't simply ignore it. Maybe it should be more explicit.


>>
>> ===Automatic Reassignment===
>> At the end of each nweek, if a RFJ has been Accepted for a whole
>> nweek the RFJ becomes Pending.
>> At the beginning of each nweek, if a RFJ is Pending the Administrator
>> shall select a new Judge for that RFJ.
>> In the event that the clock is off, every 10 ndelays all Accepted
>> RFJs become Pending and all Pending RFJs are reassigned to a new  
>> Judge.
>> }
>
> These ntimes may need to be changed to btimes if "it's the game of B"
> passes. I'm not sure what the order of resolution will be if these
> pass at the same time, actually. This could be interesting.

Right, I've just scrapped the btime proposal, sorry if that has made  
it less interesting ;-)


_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss