| Alex Smith on Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:41 -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, 2009-05-26 at 08:31 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote: > 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? > We'll have to make CFJs self-ratifying before we use them to patch gamestate bugs. They aren't quite the same as Consultations... -- ais523 _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss