Re: [Spoon-business] CFJ 1205/0 Judgment

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I of course appeal.

-- Glotmorf

On 11/18/02 at 12:46 PM Adam Hill wrote:

>I find as follows:
>
>> At the time of the incident in question, the first
>> line of Rule 578, subsection C, read:
>>
>> "Actions in this rule are not the only actions that
>> societies may take."
>>
>> This statement mandates that societies can take
>> actions other than those listed in Rule 578, but does
>> not in any way regulate what those other actions can
>> be.  Therefore, by Rule 18, "whatever is not
>> prohibited or regulated by the Ruleset is permitted
>> and unregulated," so societies can take any action at
>> all.
>
>This argument is false, because the pertinent portion of
>Rule 18 in its totality is, ?With the exception of Rule
>Changes, whatever is not prohibited or regulated by the
>Ruleset is permitted and unregulated.?  Thus, the text of
>Rule 578 allows for any actions EXCEPT Rule Changes.
>
>Also, according to Rule 10, ?No Game Action may
>circumvent or repress the Rules at any time.  This Rule
>shall always take precedence over all other Rules.?
>
>> The second line of Rule 18 reads:
>>
>> "Changing the Rules is permitted only as explicitly or
>> implicitly described by a Rule other than this Rule or
>> a set of Rules not including this Rule."
>>
>> Since the line from Rule 578, subsection C, says
>> societies can take any action, it implies societies
>> can change rules, thus satisfying the "or implicitly"
>> requirement of the line from Rule 18.  Therefore,
>> societies are permitted by Rule 578 to change rules.
>
>This argument is also false.  Rule 578 does not say that
>?societies can take any action.?  Rule 578, Section C,
>says that ?actions in this rule are not the only actions
>that societies may take.?  There is nothing implied
>or stated regarding Rule Changes.
>
>> This, however, would be true even if Rule 18
>> conflicted with Rule 578, since both rules have the
>> same Chutzpah, and Rule 33 states,
>>
>> "If two or more rules have equal Chutzpah, the rule
>> with the highest identification number takes
>> precedence."
>
>This argument is irrelevant to the previous findings.
>
>> Upon the enactment of Rule 578, M-Tek, exercising its
>> permission to take any action, made the following rule
>> on 10 November:
>>
>> {{ _Glotmorf Rules!_
>>
>> Glotmorf can change any rule e wishes, at any time e
>> wishes.  This rule takes precedence over every other
>> rule.  This rule cannot be changed or repealed except
>> by Glotmorf.  No rule can be added that would conflict
>> with this rule.
>>
>> }}
>>
>> Whereupon I, acting on authority of this new rule,
>> which, per Rule 5, would have received the highest
>> sequence number and thus held precedence over all
>> rules of Chutzpah 1, performed two actions: I set the
>> Chutzpah of Glotmorf Rules! to 1000, and I removed the
>> first sentence of Rule 578, subsection C.
>
>This argument is also false.  As stated in this Judge?s first
>finding, Rule 578 allows for all actions EXCEPT Rule Changes.
>Thus, the authority that Glotmorf claimed in this argument
>is not genuine, and his amended Rules shall not be recognized.
>Glotmorf may indeed PROPOSE such amendments, but he
>hasn?t the authority to create or amend Rules by his own
>devise.
>
>> The Administrator refused to recognize the creation of
>> the rule and my subsequent actions, based on this text
>> from Rule 2:
>>
>> "Any similarity between the string of characters that
>> constitute the name of a Player and a string of
>> characters in the text of a Proposal, Rule, or
>> Judgment shall have no impact on the implementation of
>> that Proposal, Rule, or Judgment, unless the language
>> of the Proposal, Rule, or Judgment specifically
>> indicates the string of characters is referring to a
>> Player of that name."
>>
>> However, I submit that:
>>
>> - Either Glotmorf Rules! doesn't conflict with this,
>> since the similarity to my player name and the text
>> does not impact the implementation of the rule, but
>> rather *is* the implementation of the rule; or
>>
>> - Glotmorf Rules!, if it does conflict with Rule 2,
>> takes priority since it has equal or higher Chutzpah
>> and a higher sequence number.
>
>This argument is irrelevant.  The attempted Rule called
>?Glotmorf Rules!? is neutral regarding conflict,
>because it does not exist and cannot exist unless it
>is proposed and passed.
>
>> Therefore, per all of the above, the rule entitled
>> Glotmorf Rules! was created, and it in turn gave me
>> the authority to, among other actions, change its
>> Chutzpah to 1000.
>
>No.  It was not created, and it did not give Glotmorf
>such authority ? nor may a Player or a Society make
>a Rule in the same manner in the future, unless the
>current Rules are changed drastically.


-----
The Ivory Mini-Tower: a cyber-anthropologist's blog
http://ix1.1sound.com/ivoryminitower

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