Daniel Lepage on Sun, 24 Dec 2006 11:29:05 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-b] 114.5 (Pause=4) Administrator's Update |
On Dec 23, 2006, at 6:55 PM, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote: > Antonio has delusions about it not being a state of emergency. Twice, > as far as I can tell. Eir RFJs are number 10 and 11, both assigned to > Wonko. I accept RFJ 10 and make RFJ 11 Invalid, on the grounds that it is the same as RFJ 10 and thus is no longer relevant in light of my forthcoming ruling on RFJ 10. I render judgment on RFJ 10: RFJ 10 (Antonio) ---------------- Statement: a panic button is not the same thing as a Panic Button Plaintiff's Reasoning: Rule 0 states: > A PEP may post a message to a Public Forum or any forum that within > the past month was a Public Forum stating that e is Hitting eir > Panic Button. In the whole text of rule 0, the words Panic Button are consistently capitalized, this implies that capitalization is significant regarding this rule. Judgment (Wonko) ---------------- I Render the Judgment of FALSE on RFJ 10. Judge's Reasoning: The rules don't specify how we have to capitalize words. I agree that capitalization could make a difference if a word was ambiguous to begin with, but in the case of a Panic Button there is no such ambiguity, and so a "panic button" is the same as a "Panic Button" until such time as the rules explicitly state otherwise. Note that if capitalization did matter, then this RFJ would have been invalid, because an RFJ needs exactly one "Statement", and this only has a "statement" :D -- Wonko _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business