Michael Norrish wrote: >I'd say it was clear that this "truth or falsity" refers to the >situation as the Rules see it. If the rules say "JFK was shot by an >invisible pink unicorn", and someone calls a CFJ stating that JFK was >shot by someone else, then it has to be judged false.
In this case, the Rules don't say that -- it's only a proposal that says it. The Rules don't admit to any legal fictions, and actually it's not stated so unequivocally anyway. I think that, even glossing over whether an adopted Proposal is capable of having such lasting effect, this one isn't written to successfully construct a legal fiction. It actually says: |Upon the adoption of this proposal, Goethe is deemed to have been |deregistered due to Rule 1789 (Cantus Cygneus) as of the posting of |Murphy's message It does not say "Goethe was deregistered". It says e "is deemed to have been" deregistered, which clearly means that in some specific context e is to be treated as deregistered while tactily admitting that in general e was not in fact deregistered (or at least might not have been). As for what that specific context is, all it says is "Upon the adoption of this proposal". It says nothing about *after* the adoption of this proposal. It seems to say that Goethe was deregistered for the purposes of interpreting the rest of the proposal. The rest of the proposal actually makes no use of this explicitly counterfactual context, so I read the whole thing as a nullity. For Suber's sake, Players, if you're dead set on establishing a legal fiction then please at least draft it correctly. -zefram
