[spoon-discuss] CFJ 1205/0 Judgment

[Adam Hill <adamahill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I find as follows:

> At the time of the incident in question, the first
> line of Rule 578, subsection C, read:
> 
> "Actions in this rule are not the only actions that
> societies may take." 
> 
> This statement mandates that societies can take
> actions other than those listed in Rule 578, but does
> not in any way regulate what those other actions can
> be.  Therefore, by Rule 18, "whatever is not
> prohibited or regulated by the Ruleset is permitted
> and unregulated," so societies can take any action at
> all.

This argument is false, because the pertinent portion of
Rule 18 in its totality is, ?With the exception of Rule
Changes, whatever is not prohibited or regulated by the
Ruleset is permitted and unregulated.?  Thus, the text of
Rule 578 allows for any actions EXCEPT Rule Changes.

Also, according to Rule 10, ?No Game Action may
circumvent or repress the Rules at any time.  This Rule
shall always take precedence over all other Rules.?

> The second line of Rule 18 reads:
> 
> "Changing the Rules is permitted only as explicitly or
> implicitly described by a Rule other than this Rule or
> a set of Rules not including this Rule."
> 
> Since the line from Rule 578, subsection C, says
> societies can take any action, it implies societies
> can change rules, thus satisfying the "or implicitly"
> requirement of the line from Rule 18.  Therefore,
> societies are permitted by Rule 578 to change rules.

This argument is also false.  Rule 578 does not say that
?societies can take any action.?  Rule 578, Section C,
says that ?actions in this rule are not the only actions
that societies may take.?  There is nothing implied
or stated regarding Rule Changes.

> This, however, would be true even if Rule 18
> conflicted with Rule 578, since both rules have the
> same Chutzpah, and Rule 33 states,
> 
> "If two or more rules have equal Chutzpah, the rule
> with the highest identification number takes
> precedence."

This argument is irrelevant to the previous findings.

> Upon the enactment of Rule 578, M-Tek, exercising its
> permission to take any action, made the following rule
> on 10 November:
> 
> {{ _Glotmorf Rules!_
> 
> Glotmorf can change any rule e wishes, at any time e
> wishes.  This rule takes precedence over every other
> rule.  This rule cannot be changed or repealed except
> by Glotmorf.  No rule can be added that would conflict
> with this rule.
> 
> }}
> 
> Whereupon I, acting on authority of this new rule,
> which, per Rule 5, would have received the highest
> sequence number and thus held precedence over all
> rules of Chutzpah 1, performed two actions: I set the
> Chutzpah of Glotmorf Rules! to 1000, and I removed the
> first sentence of Rule 578, subsection C.

This argument is also false.  As stated in this Judge?s first
finding, Rule 578 allows for all actions EXCEPT Rule Changes.
Thus, the authority that Glotmorf claimed in this argument
is not genuine, and his amended Rules shall not be recognized.
Glotmorf may indeed PROPOSE such amendments, but he
hasn?t the authority to create or amend Rules by his own
devise.

> The Administrator refused to recognize the creation of
> the rule and my subsequent actions, based on this text
> from Rule 2:
> 
> "Any similarity between the string of characters that
> constitute the name of a Player and a string of
> characters in the text of a Proposal, Rule, or
> Judgment shall have no impact on the implementation of
> that Proposal, Rule, or Judgment, unless the language
> of the Proposal, Rule, or Judgment specifically
> indicates the string of characters is referring to a
> Player of that name."
> 
> However, I submit that:
> 
> - Either Glotmorf Rules! doesn't conflict with this,
> since the similarity to my player name and the text
> does not impact the implementation of the rule, but
> rather *is* the implementation of the rule; or
> 
> - Glotmorf Rules!, if it does conflict with Rule 2,
> takes priority since it has equal or higher Chutzpah
> and a higher sequence number.

This argument is irrelevant.  The attempted Rule called
?Glotmorf Rules!? is neutral regarding conflict,
because it does not exist and cannot exist unless it
is proposed and passed.

> Therefore, per all of the above, the rule entitled
> Glotmorf Rules! was created, and it in turn gave me
> the authority to, among other actions, change its
> Chutzpah to 1000.

No.  It was not created, and it did not give Glotmorf
such authority ? nor may a Player or a Society make
a Rule in the same manner in the future, unless the
current Rules are changed drastically.

_____________________________________________________________
Help save rainforest or feed orphaned chimpanzees with Redjellyfish Long Distance!
http://www.redjellyfish.com/longdistance
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss