SkArcher on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 05:13:10 -0500 (CDT)


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

Re: [Spoon-business] Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: CFI assignments

On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 16:42:10 -0400 (EDT), Zarpint <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 


On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, SkArcher wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 02:05:18 -0500, Araltaln <smgafkjen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 

> SkArcher wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:39:19 -0400 (EDT), Zarpint
>> <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm honored that you quoted me. With a roll of my dice, I randomly
>>> assign
>>> -1 to Teucer and -2 to SkArcher.
>>
>>
>> I point out that I am still officially Hiding under a Rock/On Leave as 
>> of the message from Zarpint. This doesn't change anything, since Rule
>> 127 doesn't prevent players who are hiding under a rock/On leave from
>> gaining CFIs, it only specifies what happens when they become On leave 
>> while having a pending CFI
>>
>> Someone should probably patch that hole.
>
> There's no hole, come to think of it; Rule 205/7 (Leaves of Absence)
> states "A player who is On Leave cannot be selected by any process which 
> randomly selects a player," so Zarpint can't have randomly selected
> SkArcher.
So it does. Good. Now Zarpint can select again, although this time I am an 
eligible candidate.


I randomly select SkArcher to judge -2.
I rule TRUE on CFI -2, as I find instances in the rules that specifically mandate non-administrators to recognise actions (Ministers, generally)
I disagree with the plaintiffs analysis, but the statement is what I am called upon to judge, and that is TRUE 


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