Roger Hicks on Tue, 26 May 2009 10:52:49 -0700 (MST)


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

[s-b] CFJ 5a assigned to Panel {ais523, BobTHJ, Tiger}


I assign the appeal of CFJ 5 to the panel consisting of ais523,
BobTHJ, and Tiger.

5 (District Inquiry) TRUE
The page at
http://b.nomic.net/index.php?title=User:Wooble/Proposed_Ruleset&oldid=11379
contains an accurate rendition of the text of each of the current
rules.
---
Mon, 25 May 2009 20:42 - Called by Wooble
Mon, 25 May 2009 21:52 - Assigned to judge 0x44
Tue, 26 May 2009 04:03 - Judged TRUE by 0x44
Tue, 26 May 2009 13:33 - Appeal initiated by comex
Tue, 26 May 2009 16:14 - Appeal supported by Goethe
Tue, 26 May 2009 17:47 - Appealled by BobTHJ
---
ARGUMENTS
(Wooble)
The rule change was specified clearly enough to meet B's
game customs.
(comex)
Rule 105 explicitly prohibits ambiguity, and I genuinely
don't know whether to mark the new rules as enacted or amended(1) by
your proposal, especially considering the apparently redundant second
paragraph.
(0x44)
B Nomic's game custom explicitly permits simultaneous rule changes. If the
rule does not permit them, it is a regression artifact from the unilateral
assumption of Agora's ruleset.
(ais523)
Rule 217?
---
APPEALANT'S ARGUMENTS
(comex)
Rule 105 explicitly disallows simultaneous rule changes.  If those
specified by the proprosal are necessarily simultaneous, they cannot
occur at all.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business