==============================  CFJ 1324  ==============================

    Steve is NOT the Limited Executor for either Peekee or Ian.

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

Caller:                                 Crito
Barred:                                 Steve

Judge:                                  pTang
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  root
Judgement:                              FALSE

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

History:

Called by Crito:                        06 Nov 2001 14:55:42 GMT
Assigned to pTang:                      07 Nov 2001 23:40:12 GMT
pTang recused:                          15 Nov 2001 19:09:41 GMT
Assigned to root:                       15 Nov 2001 19:13:37 GMT
Judged FALSE by root:                   17 Nov 2001 06:01:52 GMT

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

Caller's Arguments:

Currently, the only existing circumstances that the Rules would allow
Steve to be Limited Executor for these ex-Players arise from the recent
Looting Auction.  Steve claims to be the winner of these auctions, and
that therefore the debts already exist, even if they have not been
announced.

Steve bases this claim on the fact that R1479 causes a debt to come into
existence whenever the Rules require a Player to be billed, whether or
not the actual bill has been announced.  While I am inclined to agree
with this assessment of R1479, I do not believe that the claim follows
from it.

Specifically, R1887 states:

      As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer
      shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a
      separate bill for each of eir winning Bids.

But the Auctioneer has not yet announced the winning Bids.  Therefore,
which Bids are "winning Bids" is, at present, indeterminate as far as
the Rules are concerned.  It follows that the identity of the winning
Bidder is alsoindeterminate from this perspective and that the Rules
thus do not yet require any particular Player to be billed.  Therefore
no such debts exist and Steve's transfers of Indulgences to the Bank
cannot yet have the effect of making him Limited Executor of anyone.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by G.:

Rule 1887(j) reads in part:

      (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are
          the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction...

So as far as the Rules are concerned, the winning Bids actually exist
("are the N largest") from the moment "when the auction ends" (which is
defined by the bidding history by other parts of 1887).  So whether or
not the participating Players can determine the winning bids without the
auctioneer's help does not affect the existence of winning bids in the
"eyes" of the Rules.

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

Judge root's Arguments:

I find Steve's and Goethe's arguments to be conclusive and complete.
Some question has been raised about the validity of Peekee's Auction,
but since the validity of Ian's Auction is undisputed, I find that Steve
was a Limited Executor for at least Ian at the time of the CFJ.
Regardless of whether or not Steve was also a Limited Executor for
Peekee, the Statement must therefore be FALSE.

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

Judge root's Evidence:

Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 19:22:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Appelt <syllepsis@oxford.gloop.org>
To: agora@win.tue.nl
Subject: BAK: Looting Auctions

As Notary, I announce that the following "Looting Auctions" begin as of
this message:

Three auctions, one for each of Peekee, Ian and Hooloovoo. These auctions
do not transfer ownership of the dissolute, but rather the weeklong
privilage of transferring property from them to yourself.

The auction currency is indulgences, and the starting bid in each auction
is 1 indulgence.

In all other respects, this auction followis the default procedure for
auctions, with Syllepsis as the Auctioneer.

Here is a list of the property held by the dissolute:

Player      Stems  VEs  Papyri  Indulgences  BITs
------      -----  ---  ------  -----------  ----
Peekee        543    0       0            0     1
Ian           218  1.0     2.4            0     1
Hooloovoo     350  0.7     3.1          1.6     1

         -Syllepsis

. .:..:..://<GlooP FooD>\:..:..:. .  .
_  .__.[http://web.gloop.org].__ ._
      ___C.onve_R-sation..._____ __
   .[IRC]raygun.oxford.gloop.org__.:.. .   .
       .   . ..::.. . .:.. . .   .   .    ..EOF


Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 10:59:27 +1000 (EST)
From: Steve Gardner <gardner@silas.cc.monash.edu.au>
To: agora-business@agoranomic.org (Agora Nomic Business List)
Subject: BUS: Looting Auction bid

I bid 2.1 Indulgences in the Looting Auction for Ian.

Steve

--
Steve Gardner                     |   Appearances to the contrary,
Dept. of Philosophy, Monash Uni.  |  things are just what they seem.
gardner@silas.cc.monash.edu.au    |


Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 11:26:01 +1100 (EST)
From: Steve Gardner <gardner@silas.cc.monash.edu.au>
To: agora-business@agoranomic.org (Agora Nomic Business List)
Subject: BUS: Looting Auction payments

Well, I'm going to proceed on the basis that I can pay the Looting
Auction debts even if they haven't been announced, and by so doing, earn
the right to loot the corpses of Peekee and Ian.

So: I pay 1.5 Indulgences to the Bank to satisfy my unannounced debt
arising from the Looting Auction for Peekee, and I pay 2.1 Indulgences
to the Bank to satisfy my unannounced debt arising from the Looting
Auction for Ian.

I believe I am now Limited Executor for Peekee and Ian for one week,
with the right to transfer Property from them to me.

Therefore, acting as Limited Executor for Peekee, I transfer 543 Stems
from Peekee to myself. Further, acting as Limited Executor for Ian, I
transfer 218 Stems, 1.0 VEs and 2.4 Papyri from Ian to myself.

The BITs owned by Peekee and Ian I leave in their possession, while I
consider what to do with them.

Steve

--
Steve Gardner                     |   Appearances to the contrary,
Dept. of Philosophy, Monash Uni.  |  things are just what they seem.
gardner@silas.cc.monash.edu.au    |

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