That sentence is this "The Prime Minister issues a specified Card to a specified player". That's a general grant of power to the PM similar to the grant of power to the referee to issue cards by summary judgement. This doesn't take precedence over the rule which makes all cards ineffective unless they meet certain criteria. Or it shouldn't. If it does, the referee is also not bound by that.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Alexis Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 at 23:51 VJ Rada <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Cards issued for reasons that don't break the rules or cards that are >> obviously inappropriate are INNEFFECTIVE. The Dive rule which Alexis >> used says "Notwithstanding rule 2426, the reason for the card >> MAY be any grievance held by the Prime Minister, not necessarily a >> violation of the rules, against the person to whom the Card is >> issued." >> >> That's a MAY not a CAN. So the card was ineffective because it is >> obviously and facially inappropriate to issue a black card to a >> player. This is the definitive answer, all other answers are wrong. >> > > The CAN is in the first sentence of this rule. -- >From V.J. Rada
