From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Fri Jun 23 07:44:46 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 HAA12880 for <blahedo@quincy.edu>; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 07:37:40 -0500
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id FAA12242 for nomic-official-outgoing; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 05:35:52 -0700
Received: from wing4.wing.rug.nl (wing4.wing.rug.nl [129.125.21.4]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id FAA12231 for <nomic-official@teleport.com>; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 05:35:42 -0700
Message-Id: <199506231235.FAA12231@desiree.teleport.com>
Received: by wing4.wing.rug.nl
	(1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA04782; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 14:35:42 +0200
From: Andre Engels <csg419@wing.rug.nl>
Subject: OFF: Judgement CFJ 780
To: nomic-official@teleport.com
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 95 14:35:42 METDST
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com
Status: RO


			JUDGMENT CFJ 780
	("That KoJen violated Rule 1023 when he distributed...")

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

Judge:		Zefram

Judgement:	UNDECIDABLE

Caller:		Steve

Eligible:	Chuck, Dave Bowen, elJefe, Ian, JonRock, Kelly,
		Michael, SugarWater, Troublemaker At Large, Vanyel,
		Xanadu, Zefram

Barred:		KoJen, Andre, Swann

Not Eligible:	Steve (caller)
		Andre, KoJen, Swann (barred)
		Blob (1005)
		Coren, Pascal (On Hold & 1005)

Effects of this CFJ:
  Zefram receives 5 points for speedy judgements

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

History:
  Called by Steve, Jun 22 1995, 13:06 +1000 (EST)
  Assigned to Zefram, Jun 23 1995, 08:22 UTC
  Judged UNDECIDABLE by Zefram, Jun 23 1995, 12:11 +0100 (BST)

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

Statement:

That KoJen violated Rule 1023 when he distributed a Proposal numbered
1607, and that he therefore incurs a 10 point penalty under that Rule.

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

Requested Injunction:

That KoJen be penalized 10 points under Rule 1023, and that he submit
a Formal Apology under Rule 908 for his violation of Rule 1023.

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

Reasons and Arguments:

Rule 1036 requires the Promotor assign numbers to Proposals "as soon
as possible" after receiving them. Rule 1023 defines "as soon as possible"
to mean "within a week, and no later than any other action which e is
subsequently required to perform". I allege that there were other actions
which the Promotor was required to perform prior to (to be precise, no
later than) his distribution of the Proposal which he numbered 1607,
namely, the numbering of other Proposals which he had received prior
to that one, and after he had received Proposal 1606. If the Judge
believes that there were other such Proposals, then e should (in my
view) Judge the Statement TRUE.

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

Decision: UNDECIDABLE

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

Reasoning of judgment:

Steve's argument is largely logically correct, and refers to rules
accurately.  Specifically, if KoJen received any valid Proposals before
he distributed Proposal 1607, then e was required by Rule 1036 (and
1023) to number them before distributing Proposal 1607.  If he received
them before receiving Proposal 1607, then he was required by Rule 1036
(and 1023) to number them before numbering Proposal 1607.

This would seem to indicate that he violated Rule 1023 in the course of
violating Rule 1036, which required him to number such Proposals before
numbering Proposal 1607.  That argument, however, arrives at the
conclusion that he neglected to number these proposals by assuming that
he numbered them in the manner required by Rule 109.  It is not
possible to rule out the possibility that he in fact numbered such
proposals before numbering Proposal 1607, but numbered at least one of
the involved proposals (definitely including the Proposal distributed
as Proposal 1607) incorrectly, and distributed them out of order.  Such
action would violate Rules 109 and 1036, but not 1023 as Proposals are
not required to be distributed As Soon As Possible.

It is noted that had the Statement referred to Rule 1036 instead of
Rule 1023, then it would have had the intended effect of requiring a
determination of whether any Proposals of the type discussed above were
actually submitted.

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

References and Evidence:

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

Rule 109/2 (Semimutable, MI=3)
Proposal Numbers

      The Promotor shall give each submitted Proposal a Number for
      reference.  The Number of a Proposal shall be the least integer
      greater than all other Numbers previously assigned to a Proposal
      (including numbers assigned to Proposals later determined to
      have been incorrectly submitted), or 301, whichever is greater.

History:
Initial Immutable Rule 109, Jun. 30 1993
Mutated from MI=Unanimity to Rule 1057, MI=3 by Proposal 1057,
  Sep. 20 1994
Amended to Rule 1067 by Proposal 1067, Oct. 4 1994
Renumbered from 1067 to 109 by Rule 1295, Nov. 1 1994
Amended(1) by Proposal 1435, Feb. 14 1995
Amended(2) by Proposal 1530, Mar. 24 1995

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

Rule 1023/2 (Mutable, MI=1)
Definition of "As Soon As Possible"

      Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action 
      "as soon as possible", e is required to perform that action 
      within a week, and no later than any other action e is
      subsequently required to perform.  Failure to observe these time
      requirements shall result at a minimum in the incursion of a 10
      point penalty; other Rules may impose further penalties.
      However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded
      from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time.

      This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its 
      requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. 
      Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be 
      performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without
      incurring a Penalty.  It takes precedence over other Rules which
      define a later latest time for the performance of these actions.
      Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this
      Rule defers to them.

      This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of
      Players who are On Hold.
      (*Was: 805/907*)

History:
Created by Proposal 805 [date unknown]
Amended by Proposal 907 [date unknown]
Amended by Proposal 1023, Sep. 5 1994
Amended(1) by Proposal 1413, Feb. 1 1995
Amended(2) by Proposal 1434, Feb. 14 1995

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

Rule 1036/2 (Mutable, MI=1)
Making and Distributing Proposals

      Let there be an Officer called the Promotor.
      The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 3 Points.
      A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the
      Promotor. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the
      Promotor shall assign the Proposal a Number.
      Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not
      later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor
      shall distribute the numbered Proposal to all Players.

      At the same time e shall distribute any text not part of the
      proposal which is required to be submitted with it, but eir
      failure to do so shall not deprive the act of distributing the
      Proposal of the effects which it would otherwise have.

History:
...
Amended(1) by Proposal 1530, Mar. 24 1995
Amended(2) by Proposal 1546, Apr. 14 1995

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