Alex Smith on Tue, 26 May 2009 10:50:29 -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 09:13 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Mon, 25 May 2009, 0x44 wrote: > > Roger Hicks wrote: > >> This is CFJ 5. I assign it to Judge 0x44. > >> > >> 5 (District Inquiry) > >> The page at > >> http://b.nomic.net/index.php?title=User:Wooble/Proposed_Ruleset&oldid=11379 > >> contains an accurate rendition of the text of each of the current > >> rules. > > The first line of Proposal 1945 states clearly that the entire ruleset is to be > > replaced with the contents of the page at the above historical Bn wiki link. To > > do so would require the complete removal of the original ruleset and the > > subsequent (and necessarily simultaneous) emplacement of the new rules. Since > > no individual rule was specified, the ruleset was repealed and enacted in toto. > > Additionally, it seems improper to set aside a UNANIMOUS decision on a > > Democratic proposal, any ambiguity that may have arisen from Proposal 1945 must > > be ignored in deference to the will of the Players. > > > > I answer CFJ 5 TRUE. > > So what happened when partway through the process the rules defining > rule changes disappeared entirely? What order did everything happen > in? If it was all repealed first, then there was no way to enact > anything. If it was done one by one, there might have been moments > when the process broke. -G. All the gamestate was destroyed apart from one instrument, which did the enacting in a block itself. That's where the now-repealed rule 5 came from. -- ais523 _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss