[Nomic] CFJ 1 (Clare Boothby to Judge)

[Duncan Richer]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, Clare Boothby wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 08:21:26AM +0100, Duncan Richer wrote:
> > CFJ 1 - Peter Maydell
> 
> Well, as no-one seems to think anything about this at all, I'm
> going to go ahead and try it before my 3 days runs out ;-)
> 
> > I request a Call For Judgment on the following statement:
> 
> I accept the appointment.

You still had three days from this point in which to think about the
Judgement, if you wanted to.  Note the exact wording on Rule 207 - "within
3 days of accepting their appointment".


> > BEGIN
> > Rule 110 (Winning the Game) states "The way to win the game
> > may not be changed from achieving n points to any other method."
> > This means that it is not permitted to adopt a proposal
> > which would change the rules so as to define a different method
> > of winning the game.
> > ENDIT
> 
> True. 

I'm really sorry about this - but I think I've discovered a flaw in your
reasoning.

Rule 105 specifies when a proposal is adopted, and that "all proposals
made in the proper way shall be voted on".  Rule 106 specified that
adopted proposals have their rule changes put into effect.  Both of these,
courtesy of Rule 204, override Rule 110 in the event of a conflict, and so
the proposal which would change the rules still gets adopted.  Of course,
as soon as it is adopted, Rule 110 stops it from having any effect, but
that's a different issue.

I may need to propose that this be overturned - if it is, and one of my
up-and-coming props passes (you'll know which one), then I'll give you
back the 10 points I get for the acceptance to cover your loss of 20.

Yours,
Slakko