==============================  CFJ 2058  ==============================

    If an officer attempts to post a self-ratifying report to a public
    forum, but it does not arrive until over a week after it left the
    officer's technical domain of control, the report nonetheless
    self-ratifies even though none of the other players are aware of
    what its contents are.

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

Caller:                                 ais523

Judge:                                  BobTHJ
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  Quazie
Judgement:                              TRUE

Appeal:                                 2058a
Decision:                               REMAND


Judge:                                  Quazie
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  cmealerjr
Judgement:                              TRUE

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

History:

Called by ais523:                       01 Jul 2008 16:53:20 GMT
Assigned to BobTHJ:                     01 Jul 2008 21:54:30 GMT
BobTHJ recused:                         01 Jul 2008 22:03:37 GMT
Assigned to Quazie:                     04 Jul 2008 06:42:33 GMT
Judged TRUE by Quazie:                  05 Jul 2008 08:28:00 GMT
Appealed by G.:                         05 Jul 2008 15:41:08 GMT
Appealed by Murphy:                     05 Jul 2008 16:11:14 GMT
Appealed by Machiavelli:                05 Jul 2008 16:40:24 GMT
Appeal 2058a:                           05 Jul 2008 22:43:33 GMT
REMANDED on Appeal:                     03 Aug 2008 17:28:18 GMT
Assigned to Quazie:                     03 Aug 2008 17:28:18 GMT
Quazie recused:                         17 Aug 2008 23:37:52 GMT
Assigned to cmealerjr:                  18 Aug 2008 00:00:02 GMT
Judged TRUE by cmealerjr:               18 Aug 2008 23:19:42 GMT

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=1905

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

Gratuitous Arguments by Murphy:

That pertained to messages not sent via the PF at all.  However, from
Rule 478:

      A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum
      or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of
      intent to be public.  A person "publishes" or "announces"
      something by sending a public message.

and from Rule 2201:

      Any public document defined by the rules as self-ratifying is
      ratified one week after its publication,

The situation described in the new CFJ may be safe, but what if the
Distributor releases a message 6d 23h 57m after it's sent and held?

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

Judge Quazie's Arguments:

I judge this to be TRUE.  The message is certainly a public message,
and by all previous precedent a person publishes a public message when
it leaves a persons technical domain of control.  As such, the message
has been in existence for the week it needs to be to fulfill R2201 and
self ratifies.  As a result, we need to fix this, as when the a-b and
what not go down, if they were to go down for more than a week we
could have some interesting scams.

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

Appellant G.'s Arguments:

I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 support.  It ignores the
precedent set for the definition of "via" in "via a public forum."

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

Gratuitous Arguments by root:

Fair enough.  I've never liked the CFJ 1646 precedent to begin with,
and I still wish the judge in that case would have kept along the
lines of CFJ 866.  CFJ 1905 directly overturned CFJ 1314 along similar
lines.

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

Judge cmealerjr's Arguments:

I have been asked to answer on when a message can claim to be sent via a
medium when there is a delay between the message leaving the sender's TDoC and
it's actual publication on the Public Fora, especially when the delay is
non-trivial. Several precedents have been set which must be considered in such
a decision as they treat issues which will be affected by whatever decision is
issued.

Some of the notable precedents include:
CFJ 1905 - which seems to require reasonable steps to be taken by a player or
eir first class basis to ensure proper delivery to the Public Forum.
CFJ 1646 - Which correctly notes that players should not be punished or held
accountable for errors outside of their control but tries an irresponsible
correction by effectively backdating messages from the perspective of other
players.

Also important are:
R478 - which requires messages to be sent via a public forum or sent to all
players...
R2201 - which governs self-ratification

What has happened is that rules and previous decisions have setup a situation
in which several events may occur simultaneously or with a non-trivial
difference, without recognizing the possibility that the events might occur at
substantially different times.

There is however, another issue. The statement is not worded correctly to
resolve this issue. The question never states at which deadline a report would
self-ratify. It merely asks if the report would self-ratify.

To this, I judge TRUE. The report does self-ratify, pursuant to other
conditions mentioned in the rules, one week after it is ACTUALLY PUBLISHED
meaning that the forum has actually made the message available for other
players to receive pursuant to CFJ 866. However, for the purpose of
determining whether the officer has discharged eir duties within a certain
time frame, and only for this purpose, the standard set by CFJ 1646 is still
applied.

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