On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 15:50 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Gratuitous arguments for the appeal: > In this case, from the Caller's Evidence, there's no record of what > happened, no reference to the event that may have made Myndzi a > player, and no reference for the judge to look it up. Only an obscure > reply to a quote that was itself truncated. Subsequent discussion in > the fora aside, at least the barest reference to the original events > should have been provided by the caller. In such a situation, a > judge is within eir rights to dismiss it undetermined.
Part of the serious problem in this case is that there isn't a whole lot of information around as-is; in particular, I'm not entirely sure if there's enough information to produce a judgement, although there may be. Even more interesting, the playership of a player is up for stake. What do we do if something important for the game is genuinely UNDETERMINED, and will continue generating more and more undetermined gamestate as time goes on? The problem on putting the onus on the CFJ caller, here, is that e may not be the best person to know the information. If the caller responds, effectively, "go on, then, continue playing with unknown gamestate", or worse, doesn't call the CFJ in the first place, then that puts the Registrar in a very difficult position; e can report Myndzi's playership as disputed, but continuing for ages with unknown registration statuses could really be damaging to Agora (c.f. Annabel, but probably not quite as bad unless Myndzi starts taking actions). -- ais523
