On 6/19/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It can (if the Board of Appeals agrees) accomplish the reversal of the judgement of CFJ 1684. Not because I disagree with its reasonableness either, but I find the judgements of CFJs 1622 and 1623 to also be reasonable, and heavily favored by the best interests of the game (specifically the avoidance of a really obnoxious amount of gamestate recalculation).
1622 and 1623 should have been appealed sooner. Avoiding gamestate recalculation may be in the interests of the players who would have to do it, but I don't see how it has anything to do with the best interests of the game itself. :-) -root
