you can move to reconsider your own judgements once automatically now. On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I support the move for reconsideration. > > On Thursday, August 2, 2018, Rebecca <edwardostra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I move for reconsideration of my judgement in CFJ 3638 and deliver the > > following (annoying) judgement. > > > > Rule 2150 states that "A player CAN publish a Notice of Honour" and then > > specifies that four conditions must be satisfied for a Notice to be > > _valid_. Valid can be defined as " > > legally binding due to having been executed in compliance with the law.". > > Therefore, the rule contemplates the existence of invalid notices of > honour > > with no legally binding effect and valid ones (this is supported by the > > fact that the rule attaches consequences only to "a valid Notice of > Honour" > > being "published". The statement of this case is "the above is a notice > of > > honour". "[T]he above" is text purporting to be a Notice of Honour > raising > > and lowering Agora's Karma by 1. Whether that Notice is valid is > > irrelevant to the statement of this case. The four conditions do not need > > to be satisfied. It is, valid or invalid, a Notice of Honour. > > > > This is in accordance with how we otherwise use English. An invalid > license > > is still a license, an expired passport is still a passport, and an > invalid > > contract is still legally a contract if formed, just unenforced. > > > > CFJ 3638 is TRUE. > > > > > > > > -- > > From V.J. Rada > > > > > -- > ~Corona > -- >From V.J. Rada
