============================== CFJ 1659 ==============================
The phrase "by announcement" and similar phrases used by the
charter of Primo Corporation, when qualified by the additional
phrase "to the Corporate Forum", are not bound by the standard
Rule definition of the phrase "by announcement".
============================== CFJ 1660 ==============================
The words "Office" and "Officer" used by the charter of Primo
Corporation, when qualified by the additional phrase "of Primo
Corporation", are not bound by the Rule definition of the words
"Office" and "Officer".
========================================================================
I proto-judge CFJ 1559 FALSE and CFJ 1560 TRUE.
Judge's arguments:
Rule 754/6 reads in part:
(2) A term explicitly defined by the Rules shall be interpreted
as having that meaning, as shall its ordinary-language
synonyms not explicitly defined by the rules.
The term "by announcement" is explicitly defined by Rule 478/17:
A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that
e performs it.
Thus, it is clear to me that the phrase "by announcement" must be
interpreted according to its Rule 478 definition, regardless of any
qualification or decoration.
However, I find that the term "Office" is not explicitly defined by
the rules. Rule 1006/15 provides that "The Rules may designate
positions to be offices" and goes on to lay out some regulations
concerning offices. As such, R1006/15 merely references the common
definition of "office" as provided for by Rule 754/6, Section 4; it
does not constitute an explicit definition of "office" any more than a
hypothetical rule governing the legalities of goose ownership would,
in so doing, define geese.
Similarly, the rules do not provide any explicit definition of the
term "officer" or of its synonym "officeholder" despite using them
frequently.
-root
