==============================  CFJ 1245  ==============================

    The Speaker has failed to initiate an Election for the Office of
    Grand Warden of the Oligarchy as required by the Rules.

========================================================================

Caller:                                 Taral

Judge:                                  Chuck
Judgement:                              FALSE

========================================================================

History:

Called by Taral:                        24 Aug 2000 23:57:44 GMT
Assigned to Chuck:                      25 Aug 2000 06:33:51 GMT
Judged FALSE by Chuck:                  02 Sep 2000 06:25:22 GMT

========================================================================

Caller's Evidence:

Excerpt from Proposal #4053 "The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy":

Be it further resolved, that a Rule of Power 1 be enacted, with Title
"The Order of Temporary Succession", reading:

      Whenever the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy has no Electee,
      and no Election for this Office is being conducted, the order of
      temporary succession is defined to be:

      the Payroll Clerk
      all other Officers in order of most recent registration
      all other Active Players in order of most recent registration

      except that the Speaker does not appear in this order.  If at least
      one Player is in this order, then the first Player in the order
      of temporary succession shall become temporary holder of the
      Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; otherwise, the Speaker shall.
      In either case, the Speaker shall initiate an Election for the Office
      of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy.  This rule takes precedence over
      Rule 790.

      Whenever the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy has an Electee,
      this Rule shall be repealed.

========================================================================

Judge Chuck's Arguments:

Rule 1956 does indeed require the Speaker to initiate an Election for
the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy.  It also provides no
explicit time limits within which this must be done.

This is not the first time the courts have addressed the issue of
actions required without any explicit time limits; however,
the courts have been inconsistent on this issue.

In CFJs 721 and 722, the Judges apparently ruled that a requirement
for action, but with no time limit, did not have any time limit at
all, either explicit or implicit, and thus an accusation that
a person has failed to comply with such a requirement should never
be found to be true.  (Side note: I have been unable to recover
CFJs 721 and 722 themselves, but this aspect is commented on
in comments attached to CFJ 846, which was decided in January
1996, and was kindly reposted by Steve in February of this year.
I have been in contact with Vanyel, who says he may have these,
but is experiencing computer problems of his own and so cannot
access them now.)  More recently (early this year or late last
year, I believe) a judge did rule that a required action with
no explicit time limit did have an implicit time limit, in
a case regarding a Referendum to Impeach, the results of
which were not reported in a timely manner.  I do not have
the record of this CFJ on hand.

I would suggest that this inconsistency ought to be resolved
by legislation, providing a default time limit for any
required action which has no other time limit specified.

However, I believe the statement in this CFJ is FALSE,
regardless of which interpretation is used.

If a required action with no explicit time limit has no
time limit at all, then clearly the Speaker has not
violated Rule 1956 by not yet initiating the required
election.

If a required action with no explicit time limit does
have some implicit (and entirely unspecified by the Rules,
thus presumably left up the the judicial system) limit,
the statement is still FALSE.  Rule 451 requires that
I determine the truth or falsity of the statement of this
CFJ at the time it was called--Aug. 24 2000, 13:57:44 GMT.
Little more than 3 days after Rule 1956 came into effect,
Aug. 21 2000, 10:51:46 GMT.  While people may dispute precisely
what implicit limit should be placed on actions with no
explicit limit, it seems highly absurd to me that such
a limit should be less than 4 days!  Indeed, even actions
required to be done "as soon as possible" have a full week
in which to be done; surely actions with no explicit limit
can be done even more leisurely than those which are required
to be done "as soon as possible".

========================================================================

Judge Chuck's Evidence:

* Time CFJ 1245 was called (quoted at the top of this message)

* Excerpts from message reporting passage of Proposal 4053,
  and thus, enactment of Rule 1956:

>From: t <ttkorkia@st.jyu.fi>
>To: Agora official <agora-official@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au>
>Subject: OFF: Assessor's Report for Proposals 4053-4056
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0008211342170.30229-100000@itu.st.jyu.fi>
>
>Agora Nomic
>Voting Report for Proposals 4053-4056
>
>Date of last Report: 15 Aug 2000
>Date of this Report: 21 Aug 2000
>
>Current Voting Mode: Public
>===========================================================================
>Voting on Proposals 4053-4055 commenced: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 19:36:57 -0500
>Voting on Proposal  4056      commenced: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 22:26:12 -0500
>Voting on Proposals 4053-4055 concluded: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 19:36:57 -0500
>Voting on Proposal  4056      concluded: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 22:26:12 -0500
>
>Num. Type Proposer     AI Title                         RESULT  F  A  -  *
>4053 Dem  harvel        2 The Grand Warden of the Ol... PASSES 11  4  0  1
>4054 Ord  Oerjan        1 General budgets               PASSES  3  1  0
>4055 Ord  Peekee        1 Respect for the dead          FAILS/Q 3  0  0
>4056 Ord  t             1 Fix the Stupid Bug            PASSES  7  0  0


* Excerpts from Chuck's comments on CFJ 846:

>CFJ 721 and 722 are of some interest here.  They both address similar
>statements, regarding the alleged violation by then-Registrar KoJen
>in announcing the vacancy in a few Offices.  Both Judges, Vanyel
>and Down with 815!, ruled that because Rule 790 imposed no time
>limit on the Registrar's duty, he could not be said to have violated
>Rule 790.


* Rule 1956

Rule 1956/0 (Power=1)
The Order of Temporary Succession

      Whenever the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy has no
      Electee, and no Election for this Office is being conducted, the
      order of temporary succession is defined to be:

      the Payroll Clerk
      all other Officers in order of most recent registration
      all other Active Players in order of most recent registration

      except that the Speaker does not appear in this order.  If at
      least one Player is in this order, then the first Player in the
      order of temporary succession shall become temporary holder of
      the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; otherwise, the
      Speaker shall.  In either case, the Speaker shall initiate an
      Election for the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy.  This
      rule takes precedence over Rule 790.

      Whenever the Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy has an
      Electee, this Rule shall be repealed.

History:
Created by Proposal 4053 (harvel), Aug. 21 2000

* Rule 451

Rule 451/3 (Power=1)
Determination of Judgement--Timing

      When a Judge is considering eir Judgement of a Statement
      contained in a CFJ, e shall make eir evaluation based on the
      truth or falsity of the Statement at the time the CFJ was
      issued.

History:
Created by Proposal 451 (Alexx), Sep. 10 1993
Amended(1) by Proposal 1412, Feb. 1 1995
Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, Jan. 25 1997, substantial
Amended(3) by Proposal 3452 (Steve), Apr. 7 1997, substantial
  (unattributed)

========================================================================