[s-b] [auto] Zarpint submits p1943

[wonko@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Auto-mailed on nweek 72, nday 6
Sent at Fri Nov  5 19:57:12 2004 GMT



Zarpint has submitted a new proposal, p1943.

---------------------------------
Proposal 1943/0: Appeals Redone
A Standard Proposal by Zarpint
Last modified on nweek 72, nday 6

Add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph of r125:
{{
A CFI may also be referred to as a CFJ, for antique [[and Roman]] reference.
}}

Change the third paragraph of r127 to:

{{
The Judge of a CFI may issue a Judgment on it. This Judgment must be one of the following (or an equivalent term that unambiguously identifies one of the following):
TRUE: The statement of the CFI was true as of the Shenanigans Call
FALSE: The statement of the CFI was false as of the Shenanigans Call
REFUSED: The statement of that CFI is unclear, nonsensical, or irrelevant to the game, or otherwise should not be judged.

In addition, the Judgment must include an Outcome. An Outcome is a collection of gamestate changes which immediately take effect. All the changes in the Outcome must directly address the disagreement that caused the CFI. The Outcome may contain no changes at all. [[It could include changing Rules, adding comments, fixing attributes, or moving Cards around, for instance.]]
}}

Change the last paragraph of r127 to:
{{
If seven or more days have passed since a judge was assigned to a CFI, any player may Recuse that Judge. When this happens, the CFI is Remanded to the Upper House, the Recuser gains 5 tildex, and the Judge ceases to be Judge of that CFI, loses 20 tildex and 2 Temporary Wisdom, and moves to the Lower Pit.
}}

Change r128 to:
{{__Appeals__

If a player believes that the judge of a CFI has issued a judgment on misinformation, overlooked an important rule or fact, or issued an Outcome that does not address the disagreement, that player may Recall Shenanigans on that CFI. This is also known as Appealing the CFI.

For ten ndays after a CFI is Appealed, every player in the Upper House other than the Plaintiff and Defendant may rule "Granted" or "Denied" on the Appeal. They may also give an analysis. These players are known as the Appellate Judges for that CFJ.

After ten days, or after a majority of all Appellate Judges have ruled the same way, the Upper House Rules on the Appeal. It Rules however the greatest number of Appellate Judges ruled. If the Upper House Rules "Denied", the Appeal is said to have been Denied, and that CFI may not be Appealed again. If the Upper House Rules "Granted", the Appeal is said to have been Granted. The original Judge stops being the Judge for that CFI and is no longer an Eligible Judge for that CFI. The Minister of Justice must then select an Eligible Judge for that CFI at random; the chosen player becomes that CFI's Judge and is moved to the Middle Ground.

When the Upper House rules, all Appellate Judges who ruled opposite the Upper House receive 1 Permanent Wisdom. [[Yesternday's dissents are tonday's wisdom.]]

In the event of a tie, the Appeal is Denied.
}}
---------------------------------



This Message was sent automatically by the Wiki.
 Please do not reply to this message, as your replies will be ignored. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business