On Sat, 2013-07-20 at 09:21 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I just remember the result, and that's how we've been playing in > general (e.g. if I awarded a Herald award after a time limit, > no one said it failed). I don't remember logic or rules needed to > back it up, so I don't know if that interpretation is still good > (anyone remember the case?).
It's probably not the same case, but CFJs 2785, 2787, 2788, 2789 is my favourite Agoran-legal snarlup (at least, out of the ones I'm responsible for), leading to a CFJ (2785) which had two failed attempts to judge it, and which eventually nobody was obligated to judge (although Murphy elected to do so anyway). It lead to one of the more interesting precedents on how obligations follow offices (although it's about what happens if the obligation changes from one office to another, rather than if the obligation stays with the officer but the officer changes). -- ais523
