==============================  CFJ 1612  ==============================

    Rule 1871 should be interpreted such that it is possible to publish
    a Notice of Rotation, and that such a Notice has the effect of
    making all turned players unturned, even if there is no open CFJ
    with no Trial Judge assigned to it

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

Caller:                                 Zefram

Judge:                                  GreyKnight
Judgement:                              DISMISS


Judge:                                  Manu
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  Murphy
Judgement:                              TRUE

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

History:

Called by Zefram:                       31 Jan 2007 13:38:38 GMT
Assigned to GreyKnight:                 31 Jan 2007 15:53:01 GMT
Dismissed by GreyKnight:                31 Jan 2007 15:53:01 GMT
Assigned to Manu:                       30 Mar 2007 20:02:15 GMT
Manu recused:                           06 Apr 2007 23:02:58 GMT
Assigned to Murphy:                     11 Apr 2007 05:03:24 GMT
Judged TRUE by Murphy:                  11 Apr 2007 21:00:04 GMT

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

Judge GreyKnight's Arguments:

In addition, Zefram having previously made five or more CFJs during the
same Agoran Week, I dismiss CFJs 1610, 1611, and 1612 as Excess CFJs,
by Rule 2024 (and with a particularly cheeky grin on my face).

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

Judge Murphy's Arguments:

At the time this CFJ was called, Rule 1871/8 (see evidence) was in
effect.

  * The closest thing to an explicit definition of "Notice of Rotation"
    is "an announcement".  By game custom, this is interpreted as "an
    announcement identifying itself as a Notice of Rotation".

  * Based on the precedent set by the final judgement of CFJ 1594, the
    definition of "Notice of Rotation" does not depend on the Clerk of
    the Courts specifying an appropriate CFJ, or even on the existence
    of such an appropriate CFJ.  In the first case, the Clerk of the
    Courts violates Rule 1871 by inaction; in the second case, e
    violates it by action; but in both cases, the announcement is still
    a Notice of Rotation.  Such dependencies exist only if the Rule
    explicitly says they do.

  * Also based on the precedent set by the final judgement of CFJ 1594,
    the effect of publishing a Notice of Rotation does not depend on the
    Clerk of the Courts specifying an appropriate CFJ, or even on the
    existence of such an appropriate CFJ.  Again, such dependencies
    exist only if the Rule explicitly says they do.

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

Judge Murphy's Evidence:

Rule 1871/8 (Power=1)
Turns for All

      Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes
      turned.  Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any
      future CFJs.  When a player registers, e is considered turned.

      Whenever an open CFJ has no Trial Judge assigned to it, and
      there are no players eligible to be assigned, the Clerk of the
      Courts shall publish a Notice of Rotation, specifying at least
      one such CFJ.  Upon such an announcement, all turned players
      become unturned.

      The CotC may turn a player e expects to judge CFJs slowly or not
      at all, without 2 objections.

      If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by selecting a
      Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal who is not eligible to judge
      that CFJ or Appeal solely because e is turned, then that
      selection shall stand, unless the Clerk of the Courts points out
      eir error and makes a new selection before the selected Player
      returns Judgement.

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