Re: spoon-business: TheeFJ 251

[Eric Gerlach <egerlach@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 05:27 PM 2002-01-15 -0500, you wrote:
> "The rules do not require the entity which casts votes to be a player,
> and hence the votes submitted by Glortmorfs imaginary friends (and, for
> that matter, Wonkos friends) are valid, and should be taken in to
> account when the administrator tallies the votes and determines the
> passage or failure of the proposals in the cuurent ballot."
>
> I judge the statement to be FALTH. I mean FALSE.
>
> Analysis:
>
> Rule 30, which reads "Each Player may cast exactly one vote on each
> proposal on any given Ballot.", serves to regulate the action of voting.
> Since voting is thus regulated by the rules, non-player entities may
> only vote as specified by the rules. No rule specifies how a non-player
> entity should vote.

As much as I agree with the ruling on this CFJ, I think it sets a bad legal 
precdent, as I think the reasoning for the ruling isn't correct.  I 
therefore humbly submit the following 2 CFJ statements:

CFJ #1:  Non-player entities are allowed to vote.

Analysis:  The ruling on CFJ 251 specifies that "No rule specifies how a 
non-player entity should vote."  Thus there is no rule forbidding the 
voting of non-player entities.  Thus by Rule 18, they may.

CFJ #2:  None of the prospective players: Maggie Peters, Tabatha Sayle, 
Shea, Eliza Carter, Mahmoud Rafik, Bob Harney, Cheryl Smith, Jason Hodges, 
Bob Brown, Clio the Cat, Janice Yeh, Joe MacArthur, Lydia Blankenship, 
Steve Osgood, Pirx, Aknar the Hunter, Fidelio, Eva Vilevska, Asnaggazeth, 
Sir Fancys Bacon, Bob1, Bob2, Bob3, Bob4, Bob5, Bob6, Bob7, Bob8, Bob9, 
Bob10, Bob11, Bob12, Bob13, Bob14, Bob15, Bob16, Bob17, Bob18, Bob19, 
Bob20, Bob21, Bob22, Bob23, Bob24, Bob25, Bob26, Bob27, Bob28, Bob29, and 
Bob30 were capable of transferring eir proxies to Glotmorf or Wonko, and 
therefore, did not vote on the ballot for nweek 4 (3 for a zero-based clock).

Analysis: Under rule 26, a prospective player must make a post to a public 
forum in order to become a player.  None of the above have done this.  Even 
though they may not be in a state to do this, the rules are still very 
clear that each prospective player must make eir own post to the public 
forum.  I don't care if this is discriminatory, until the rules are fixed 
to avoid such discrimination, this is not legal.

Continuing the argument, Rule 208 reads: "A player may designate another 
player to be the holder of eir proxy".  This says it all.  Those named 
above are not players, therefore they cannot have transferred eir proxies 
and voted.  Nor were they game entities identified by the rules at the time 
of voting, in which case there *might* have been a loophole.