On Mon, Mar 2, 2020, 06:45 Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > My proposal would just create an ambiguity in the rules, and we never > judge DISMISS due to an ambiguity in the rules; we pick an interpretation > instead. > > Why is this? (Is it just culture? A CfJ-rule? A rule?) > Well, Rule 217 "Interpreting the Rules" says that "Where the text [of the rules] is silent, inconsistent, or unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game." I think that game custom, common sense, past judgements and consideration of the best interests *all* demand that, if the rules are ambiguous, we pick one interpretation and go with that one. Judging a case DISMISS because the rules are ambiguous, and considering the gamestate to be fundamentally ambiguous as a result, would be unprecedented (I think) and extremely unconventional. —Warrigal >
