Roger Hicks on Tue, 26 May 2009 07:31:19 -0700 (MST)


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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] [CotC] CFJ 5 assigned to Judge 0x44


On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 07:33, comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I intend to appeal this with two support.  Rule 105 explicitly disallows
> simultaneous rule changes.  If those specified by the proprosal are
> necessarily simultaneous, they cannot occur at all.
>
comex's reasoning is sound, but I specifically do not support the
appeal of this case. It seems to me it is better for the good of the
game to allow the judgment to stand as it allows us to get on with it.

Perhaps a ruleset ratification could paper over this issue?

BobTHJ
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss