I'm sorry, but I keep hearing this and I don't know what it means. Does
it mean that you wish to be the Judge?
Jason Cobb
On 6/10/19 8:53 PM, Rebecca wrote:
i favor this one
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:28 AM Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote:
On general principle - yep! The Rules can delegate to other documents like
that. A good example is Tournaments (R2464) where winning is delegated -
at times we've allowed tournaments to hold/award Coins and change other
game quantities other than winning.
For Proposals specifically I think that would be a court case - by R106, a
proposal "takes effect" and applies all its provisions instantaneously,
then
is done. I'm not sure a continuous effect like that in a proposal would
"continue having effect" once its done.
On 6/10/2019 4:46 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
I might be missing some precedent here, but if the wording was "except
as
described by a proposal or rule", then couldn't I submit a proposal that
says something to the effect of "Any player CAN, by announcement,
expunge
any number of Blots from emself." and then have that wording captured by
the
Rule?
The authorizing Instrument would be the Rule, giving it power to do
secured
changes. The Rule explicitly delegates to the proposal, thus effectively
giving it the entire power of the Rule to destroy assets.
Jason Cobb
On 6/10/19 3:34 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Interesting catch.
It's the difference between "except by a proposal or rule" versus
"except as described by a proposal or rule" which is the usual phrasing
that would work fine - so the question is can we infer the "as
described"
part - which might be a hard sell given how picky we usually are on
attributing causality. No this hasn't been adjudicated before to my
knowledge.
On 6/10/2019 12:10 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
CFJ: "A Player with Blots CAN destroy a Blot in eir possession if e
has
neither gained blots nor expunged any blots from emself in the current
Agoran week."
Caller's Evidence ================= Excerpt from Rule 2555/2 ("Blots")
[Power=2]
Blots are an indestructible fixed currency with ownership
restricted to persons.
[...]
To expunge a blot is to destroy it.
[...]
If a player has neither gained blots nor expunged any blots from
emself in the current Agoran week, e CAN expunge 1 blot from
emself by announcement.
Excerpt from Rule 2577/1 ("Asset Actions") [Power=3]
An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by
announcement,
subject to modification by its backing document. An
indestructible
asset is one defined as such by it backing document, and CANNOT
be
destroyed except by a proposal or rule, other than this one,
specifically addressing the destruction of indestructible assets
or that asset in particular; any other asset is destructible.
Caller's Arguments
==================
I argue that when a player announces that e expunges a Blot from
emself,
then e is the one destroying the Blot. Thus, under Rule 2577, the Blot
CANNOT be destroyed, as it was not destroyed "by a proposal or rule,
other than [Rule 2577], specifically addressing the destruction of
indestructible assets or that asset in particular", but rather by the
Player.
I argue that Rule 2240 ("No Cretans Need Apply") does not apply, as
the
definition of an asset being "indestructible" does not occur in Rule
2555, but Rule 2555 rather defers to Rule 2577 for the definition, and
then later attempts to override the definition in Rule 2577. Thus the
conflict is between two Rules, rather than within the text of a
certain
rule.
If the above two arguments are found valid, then Rule 1030
("Precedence
between Rules") states that the Rule with the higher Power takes
precedence. In this case that is Rule 2577. This would mean that Blots
CANNOT be destroyed.
I thus argue that the ruling on this CFJ should be FALSE.
[NB: if there is precedent that I am missing, please tell me and I
will
withdraw this. I didn't see any historical rulings on "indestructible"
assets, and the ones that I found on Blots seemed not to be relevant.
I
was unable to find precedent on conflicts with definitions solely by
searching the statements of CFJs.]
