==============================  CFJ 1303  ==============================

    Razl is Noisy.


Caller:                                 G.
Barred:                                 Kelly
Barred:                                 Taral

Judge:                                  Blob
Judgement:                              FALSE



Called by G.:                           25 Jun 2001 04:29:43 GMT
Assigned to Blob:                       25 Jun 2001 04:35:20 GMT
Judged FALSE by Blob:                   01 Jul 2001 03:14:49 GMT


Judge Blob's Arguments:

Rule 1042 states that a player becomes Noisy whenever e posts to the Public
Forum. What is posted is irrelevant. It is only tradition that players
post "I become Noisy" in order to become so. It is the fact that they posted
that makes them noisy, not the content of the post.

Steve tried to make Razl noisy as follows:

> I am Razl's Executor. R1478 empowers me to act as if I were Razl.
> I now employ this power.
> Acting as if I were Razl, I make Razl Noisy.

We can infer from the argument above that say "I make Razl Noisy" will only
make Razl Noisy if Razl is legally deemed to have posted this message. The
content of the message is irrelevant. Steve could just as easily have posted
"Acting as if I were Razl, I make Razl stand on his head." which would have
as much success in making Razl Noisy as the statement e did post.

Having established that the content of the message is irrelevant, I appeal
to the precedent set by CFJ 1253 to rule that a message sent by an Executor
containing actions done on behalf of another player is not considered to
have been sent by that Player, and thus does not make that Player Noisy.

Steve has put forth the argument that e was not acting on behalf of Razl,
but "as if e were" Razl, treating the two clauses of R1478 as if they were
distinct powers. I doubt the existance of this distiniction, but regardless
I do not see its bearing on the matter. Even if Steve were acting as if e
were Razl, e did so in attempting to make Razl Noisy (which had no effect),
not in posting the message.

It might be possible for an Executor to actually post a message explicitly
on behalf of or as if e were another Player. It is not the position of
the Judge to rule on that issue. I only find that the message in question
was not sufficient to do so. Therefore I judge the statement FALSE.