Alex Smith on Tue, 26 May 2009 10:50:29 -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 09:13 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Mon, 25 May 2009, 0x44 wrote:
> > Roger Hicks wrote:
> >> This is CFJ 5. I assign it to Judge 0x44.
> >> 
> >> 5 (District Inquiry)
> >> The page at
> >>
> >> contains an accurate rendition of the text of each of the current
> >> rules.
> > The first line of Proposal 1945 states clearly that the entire ruleset is to be 
> > replaced with the contents of the page at the above historical Bn wiki link. To 
> > do so would require the complete removal of the original ruleset and the 
> > subsequent (and necessarily simultaneous) emplacement of the new rules. Since 
> > no individual rule was specified, the ruleset was repealed and enacted in toto. 
> > Additionally, it seems improper to set aside a UNANIMOUS decision on a 
> > Democratic proposal, any ambiguity that may have arisen from Proposal 1945 must 
> > be ignored in deference to the will of the Players.
> >
> > I answer CFJ 5 TRUE.
> So what happened when partway through the process the rules defining
> rule changes disappeared entirely?  What order did everything happen
> in?  If it was all repealed first, then there was no way to enact 
> anything.  If it was done one by one, there might have been moments
> when the process broke.    -G.

All the gamestate was destroyed apart from one instrument, which did the
enacting in a block itself. That's where the now-repealed rule 5 came


spoon-discuss mailing list