Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Judment on RFJ 20

[zagarna <zagarna@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Harrison, Andrew" wrote:
> 
> > From: zagarna [mailto:zagarna@xxxxxxxxx]
> >
> > In the matter:
> > Alterations to Active Proposals or Motions which are not
> > recognised by the start
> > of an nweek's voting do not alter any Ballot Issues.
> >
> > I rule:
> > FALSE
> 
> <snip!>
> 
> > Judicial orders:
> > 1) The administrator shall credit the player Zagarna 500 points.
> 
> Lol!
> Nice one. Unfortunately I don't think it'll work. Even though we've had a
> previous RFJ where the judgement didn't agree with the ruling and still had
> to be accepted, I don't think this is the same. While I'll agree that your
> reasoning and judgement are impeccable, I don't think you can make a
> judicial order like that.
> 
> Rule 214/0 : Judicial Orders
> 
> A Judicial Order is an Order issued by a Judge or Appeals Court in
> conjunction with eir Judicial duties. A Judge may, in the course of making a
> Judgment, issue one or more Judicial Orders to bring the game state into
> accord with the result of the Judgment.
> 
> So you are only allowed to issue Judicial Orders in order to 'bring the game
> state into accord with the result of the Judgment', and I don't believe that
> your order does this, and is therefore invalid.
> 
> :-)
> 
> --
> The Kid

:) part of the stuff you snipped said that i judged my reasoning to be soo good
that I deserved to win the game: the order I issued was precisley meant to
"bring the game state into accord with the result of the Judgment."

:-)

Zagarna

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com