On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 17:50, Joshua Murphy <math...@ymail.com> wrote: > People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't really rules. > If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make them actual rules?
CFJ procedure is codified in the rules. A CFJ itself can be called by any player to clarify any issue. It wouldn't really make sense to make CFJs into rules because they are, generally, interpretations of rules (unless they are interpretations of something else relevant to the game of Agora). Basically, when a matter of controversy arises in the game/rules, someone will call a CFJ and after the judgement/appeals process is complete, the resulting decision is regarded as the way of the game.
