David E. Smith on 27 Jun 2001 16:18:20 -0000

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

spoon-business: RFJ 49 Judgment

There may be a few little quirks in the terminology, as the nomic.net Web
server is down again. Nevertheless, here cometh the ruling...

(begin ruling)

Statement: The judgement on RFJ 47 is invalid because the selection of The
Kid as Judge violated Rule 236/1.

Plaintiff's Analysis:

>Rule 236/1 states:
>"The following are excluded from serving as Judges on a Request for Judgment:
>      1. the Plaintiff
>      2. Judges previously recused from the Request
>      3. any one Player that the Plantiff requests be recused from the Request
>The Kid made the Request for Judgement on May 10, 2001, and since there is
>more than one Player in the game, he can never be selected as Judge.  Not
>every eligible Player was selected, in addition, the previously recused
>Judges must be selected again to judge before he can be considered.

Ruling: TRUE

Judge's Analysis:

What the plaintiff said.

Judicial Orders:

I order that RFJ 47 be re-assigned to an eligible judge and that the
previous ruling be discarded. Alternately, an identical RFJ may be opened
with a new number, at the discretion of the judiciary. (The former option
makes a bit more sense, but the latter may be easier to track in the

Either way, said RFJ may not be assigned to: The Kid (as the caller for
the RFJ); any one party selected by The Kid at eir discretion (per Rule
236/1, should e choose to invoke it); Aranor (previously recused from
judgment); PurpleBob (for conflict-of-interest reasons).

(end ruling)

The tribe has spoken.


---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://metadave.net/

I used to drive a Heisenbergmobile, but every
time I looked at the speedometer, I got lost.