On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:00 PM Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2017, at 11:55 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandlight17@ > gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:29 PM Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > > > Leaving aside that one budget is not fully determinate, it is definitely >> the case that, if Quazie is a player, then this action would make Quazie’s >> Expenditure is no less than 225, and may be greater. The current Income Cap >> is 100. >> >> Assuming that Quazie is a player, as Secretary, I declare em Bankrupt, as >> per Rule 2462. >> > > I CFJ (barring Quazie) on the statement "Assuming that Quazie is a player, > e has, within the past week, exceeded the Budget Cap." Arguments: > "Allowable" could mean either "possible" or "permissible". If it's the > later, e has not exceeded the Cap, as the highest permissible value is the > highest value e could not be punished for. Additionally, if the action is > ambiguous between the two (or otherwise > > > Income Cap. > > -o > Oops. Does that invalidate the CFJ? I can't seem to find any way to > withdraw it, so I guess I'll just hope the Judge judges it on the merits. > -Aris
