Doig, Gavin on 11 Jan 2002 13:15:47 -0000

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

RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: The most-revised proposal ever: 236 again

Title: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: The most-revised proposal ever: 236 again

> >No, it does happen.  Under the statute of limitations, if no one noted
> >the discrepancy and submitted a CFJ, those changes to the game state
> >would be regarded as legal once the statute of limitations expired.  The
> >rules and game state are changed -- actually changed -- until someone
> >CFJs and a ruling is made that invalidates the changes.
> But in that case, the game state would not have been changed by the lack of
> a CFJ, but rather the game state would have been changed by the Statute of
> Limitations rule which codified the erroneous records into the game state,
> thus making them part of the game state.

What he said. ;-)

I was ignoring the statute of limitations because it complicates things, but CFJs should never change the gamestate. If they're before the statute, then they simply lead to changes in our records, and if they're after, then they don't change anything because the "illegal" action has been made legal.


This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is  privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable  law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender of this message as soon as possible.

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited