Alex Smith on Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:41 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] [CotC] CFJ 5 assigned to Judge 0x44

On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 08:31 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 07:33, comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I intend to appeal this with two support.  Rule 105 explicitly disallows
> > simultaneous rule changes.  If those specified by the proprosal are
> > necessarily simultaneous, they cannot occur at all.
> >
> comex's reasoning is sound, but I specifically do not support the
> appeal of this case. It seems to me it is better for the good of the
> game to allow the judgment to stand as it allows us to get on with it.
> Perhaps a ruleset ratification could paper over this issue?
We'll have to make CFJs self-ratifying before we use them to patch
gamestate bugs. They aren't quite the same as Consultations...


spoon-discuss mailing list