From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Thu Mar 30 00:57:44 1995
Return-Path: nomic-official-owner@teleport.com
Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.11]) by Shamino.quincy.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id AAA07320; Thu, 30 Mar 1995 00:57:42 -0600
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id XAA08142 for nomic-official-outgoing; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 23:03:05 -0800
Received: from mizar.astro.indiana.edu (mizar.astro.indiana.edu [129.79.160.43]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA08111 for <nomic-official@teleport.com>; Wed, 29 Mar 1995 23:02:57 -0800
Received: from poverty by mizar.astro.indiana.edu with uucp
	(Smail3.1.28.1 #7) id m0ruEFr-0001V0C; Thu, 30 Mar 95 02:02 EST
Received: by poverty.bloomington.in.us (V1.17-beta/Amiga)
	  id <2j8y@poverty.bloomington.in.us>; Thu, 30 Mar 95 01:56:06 EST5
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 95 01:56:06 EST5
Message-Id: <9503300656.2j8y@poverty.bloomington.in.us>
From: kelly@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Kelly Martin)
To: nomic-official@teleport.com
Subject: OFF: CFJ759: Judgement
Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com
Status: RO

======================================================================
			 JUDGEMENT OF CFJ 759
(The latest Score report (dated March 26) has TAL's score in error...)
======================================================================

  Judgement:  TRUE

  Judge:   Dave Bowen

  Eligible to Judge:  Blob, Coren, Dave Bowen, Elde, elJefe,
		      Jeffrey, JonRock, Kelly, Michael, Oerjan,
		      Steve, Vlad, Pascal, Xanadu, Andre, Swann,
		      Vanyel

  Caller:  TAL

  Scorekeepor:
    Dave Bowen receives 5 Points for speedy Judgement

----------------------------------------------------------------------

History:
  Called Tue, 28 Mar 95 16:41:49 SET
  Assigned Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:30 UTC to Dave Bowen
  Judged TRUE Wed, 29 Mar 1995 12:40:21 -0600 by Dave Bowen
  --> Dave Bowen receives 5 Points 

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

Statement:

"The latest Score report (dated March 26) has TAL's score in error,
as it did not take into account the Officer salaries TAL should have
received since the beginning of the current game."

Barred Players: KoJen, Chuck

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Arguments:

According to Rule 1007 `Officers shall receive a salary of 3 Points
per week, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary',
while according to Rule 1006 `An Officer is any Player who has been
Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules.'

Well, in the past I have been CotC and I have been Scorekeepor.
That makes me still an Officer according to 1006 and therefore I presume
I have right to the 3 Points falling each Monday to Officers.

In this case that means all Mondays since the start of the current
Game.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

Rule 1007/0 (Mutable, MI=1)
Default Salary of Officers

      Officers (excluding Viziers, Ordinancekeepors, and any other
      Officers whose duties pertain only to a single Group) shall
      receive a salary of 3 Points per week, unless another Rule
      explicitly states another salary.

Rule 1006/1 (Mutable, MI=1)
Defaults for Officers

      An Officer is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to
      an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer.

      An Officer may be replaced by another Player by a Directive to
      install that Player into the Office.  The Proposal containing
      such a Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1.

      An Officer may resign at any time, provided e appoints a
      successor.

      If an Officer resigns while a Referendum is being voted upon to
      replace eim, the Player thus proposed will by eis Successor.

      An Officer shall be appointed only if e consents.

      This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to
      Rules for specific Offices.

History:
...
Amended(1) by Proposal 1336, Nov. 22 1994

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

Judgment:  TRUE

Explanation: First, I note that I was strongly tempted to decline judgement
             for I am in a situation similar to TAL.  I have served as
             Banker and Clerk of the Courts over the history of this game
             and could conceivably benefit from this decision.  But I note
             that much of the Agora community is also in this situation and
             for me to disqualify myself just because my own situation could
             be affected could set a precedent that would leave us with a
             critically small pool of potential justices.  I believe that
             I can decide this case on its merits without the possible benefit
             affecting my judgement.

             Rule 1006/1 is quite clear in its definition of an Officer as
             "any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office
             specified in the Rules." TAL certainly meets this criterion.
             Now Rule 1006/1 also states that "An Officer may resign at any
             time, provided e appoints a successor."  One might argue an
             Officer ceases to be an Officer at the point where e resigns
             eis last Office.  I contend that if that were the case Rule
             1006/1 would have stated that an Officer is any Player who
             currently hold an Office specified in the Rules or some similar
             statement.  Furthermore, I note in Rule 880/0, which TAL did not
             cite, that "No Officer may be 'On Hold' while holding an Office."
             If one ceases to be an Officer when one resigns the Office, then
             the language in Rule 880 is redundant.  It seems apparent that
             the author of Rule 880 believed that Officers remained Officers
             even when not holding Office.  Thus I find that TAL was an
             Officer and remained an Officer even after he resigned his Office.

             Having reached this conclusion, Rule 1007/0 quite clearly states
             that all Officers, and not just those holding Office, shall
             receive a salary of 3 Points per week, unless another Rule
             explicitly says another salary.  Since there is no Rule specifying
             another salary for former officeholders, TAL should be paid
             the 3 Points per week salary specified in Rule 1007/0.

======================================================================
--
kelly martin                                 <kelly@poverty.bloomington.in.us>

       I have been told that when a large group of people believe in a
     fantasy, it is called a culture.  When a small group believes, it is
      called a cult.  When two people believe in a fantasy, it is called
	 love; and when one person believes, it is called psychosis.