On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 00:17 +0000, Aris Merchant wrote: > If this proposal is not already pending, I pend it for 1 AP. This works as intended even without the conditional, under our current rulings; you can't pay to pend a proposal if it's already pending.
> If I have not already done so, I call this case for 5 shinies. This is the one I'm most sympathetic to out of your three examples; charging for CFJs does give a reason to not just unconditionally call it the "potentially second time". > If Alexis has been awarded a card, I point my finger at the Referee. This is an abuse of conditionals IMO. You're basically saying "I accuse the Referee, if and only if e actually committed the crime". In other words, it's an attempt to get out of being held liable for a false accusation by making it only if it's true, and while still causing people to do all the work required to respond to the accusation (because they need to determine if it's true or not to determine whether you made it). -- ais523
