On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Pavitra wrote: > On 12/21/2011 06:32 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > > (Thanks to Bucky for discussing this with me.) > > > > CFJ (barring Bucky): With no changes to rule 2333, nor to other rules > > that would change how rule 2333 is interpreted, if a contestmaster > > announces that one or more persons "win the contest", and then someone > > announces that all those players satisfy the Victory Condition of > > Victory, doing so would be a true Victory Announcement. > > > > Arguments: I think this is pretty much uncontroversially TRUE. I need > > the CFJ's existence for another purpose, though. > > Ambiguous: does "doing so" refer to the contestmaster's announcement, or > the other announcement directly about victory?
Other little things: "win the contest" in quotes is conditions that generally SHOULD be in the contract; the required announcement by the contestmaster is that certain conditions have been satisfied. These are probably very little things because they don't amount to a big time paradox. It occurs to me that the Contest Win Condition is problematic; if a contestmaster makes a mistaken announcement of a win, it's a victory condition even if a judgement finds that the contest wasn't "won". It wasn't a problem when the victory went to the Victory Case for judgement). Also, Proto: A medal for anyone who manipulates a time-based loophole during a holiday. -G.
