==============================  CFJ 2686  ==============================

    Murphy awarded at least one point in the message in which this case
    was initiated.


Caller:                                 Murphy

Judge:                                  Wooble
Judgement:                              FALSE



Called by Murphy:                       15 Sep 2009 08:36:20 GMT
Assigned to Wooble:                     16 Sep 2009 07:06:40 GMT
Judged FALSE by Wooble:                 17 Sep 2009 13:38:59 GMT


Caller's Arguments:

Rule 2233 says "so long as the total number of points
awarded or revoked on any axis do not exceed that contest's threshold
index", but does not specify the scope of this total (the intent was
weekly).  I argue that it may be as narrow as a single message, or
even a single awarding action within a message, or on the other hand
it may be as broad as the lifetime of the contest.


Judge Wooble's Arguments:

R2233 reads, in part:

      The contestmaster of a contest CAN and SHALL award and revoke
      points as directed by that contract up so long as the total
      number of points awarded or revoked on any axis do not exceed
      that contest's threshold index.

There are 3 possible readings of this as written:

1. Each reward of points is limited by the rewarding contest's
threshold, so a contestmaster can award infinite points as long as
each awarding action is within the threshold.  I reject this reading
because "total number of points" implies a sum of points awarded in a
set of actions, and further because even if this is ambiguous,
allowing infinite point grants wouldn't be in the best interests of
the game.

2. A contestmaster can only award points if the total number of points
ever awarded on the axis on which e's awarding, by all contests
combined, does not exceed the contest's threshold.  This is an
attractive reading of this sentence taken by itself, but the remainder
of the rule, particularly the clause making rewards or revocations
that counteract other rewards or revocations not count against the
limit, makes it clear that this is not a good interpretation.  This
leaves us with 3:

3. A contest can reward a total number of points equal to its
threshold limit over the life of the contest.

Since the contest in question, the Cookie Jar, has awarded more than
20 points on each axis in its lifetime, any point rewards made after
the passage of P6369 on 29 June were INVALID.  The other contests,
with the exception of comex's scam contest, have all also exceeded
their thresholds as far as I can tell; it's presently IMPOSSIBLE to
award points.