From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Mon Jun 26 04:36:48 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 EAA19840 for <blahedo@quincy.edu>; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 04:35:31 -0500
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id CAA01458 for nomic-official-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:34:48 -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 CAA01451 for <nomic-official@teleport.com>; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:34:43 -0700
Message-Id: <199506260934.CAA01451@desiree.teleport.com>
Received: by wing4.wing.rug.nl
	(1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA18698; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:34:47 +0200
From: Andre Engels <csg419@wing.rug.nl>
Subject: OFF: Judgement CFJ 782
To: nomic-official@teleport.com
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 95 11:34:46 METDST
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com
Status: RO

			ASSIGNMENT OF CFJ 782
		("That the most recent Promotor's report...")

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

Judge:		Dave Bowen

Judgement:	FALSE

Caller:		Steve

Eligible:	Andre, Chuck, Dave Bowen, elJefe, Ian, JonRock, Kelly
		KoJen, Michael, SugarWater, Swann, TAL, Vanyel, Xanadu
		Zefram

Barred:		none

Not Eligible:	Steve (caller)
		Blob (1005)
		Coren, Pascal (On Hold & 1005)

Changes:	Dave Bowen receives 5 Points for speedy Judgement.

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

History:
  Called by Steve, Jun 23 1995, 01:24 +1000 (EST)
  Assigned to Dave Bowen, Jun 23 1995, 09:13 UTC
  Judged FALSE by Dave Bowen, Jun 23 1995, 09:19 -0500

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

Statement:

That the most recent Promotor's Report, in which a Proposal numbered
1607 has been distributed, is in error, in that this Proposal has
been distributed later than other Proposals, not yet distributed by
the Promotor, which were received by him earlier than this Proposal,
and in that this Proposal has been distributed with an incorrect Number. 

Requested Injunction:

I request that the Judge issue an Injunction requiring Promotor KoJen
to distribute a corrected Promotor's Report forthwith, containing
the texts and correct numbers for all the Proposals which has received
since the numbering of Proposal 1606 and prior to the distribution of
the erroneously numbered Proposal 1607.

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

Reasons and Arguments:

Both the distribution and the numbering are in contravention of Rule 1036.

First the distribution: Rule 1036 requires that the Promotor distribute
numbered Proposals "not later than any subsequently received Proposal".
Hence the Promotor cannot legally distribute the above Proposal unless
and until he has distributed the other Proposals which he has received
prior to this one.

On the numbering: Rule 1036 requires the Promotor to assign Numbers
to Proposals "as soon as possible" after receiving them. From Rule
1023, "as soon as possible" means "within a week, and no later than
any other action which e is subsequently required to perform". Hence
the above Proposal can only be numbered 1607 if the Promotor has not
received any other Proposals since Proposal 1606 was given its
number.  I allege that this is not the case: that the Promotor has
received other Proposals prior to this one, and that one of these
Proposals (in fact, whichever was the earliest received of them) is
the correct deserver of the number 1607.

Naturally, the truth of the CFJ rests entirely on the matter of
whether Promotor KoJen is correct in maintaining that he has in fact
received no texts prior to the one he distributed as Proposal 1607,
which are to be regarded as legally submitted Proposals. This
matter is currently under consideration by another Judge.

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

Judgement: FALSE

Reasoning: This judge agrees with Plantiff's claim that the truth of this
           CFJ rests entirely on the question of whether the Promoter has
           in fact received no validly submitted Proposals prior to the
           one he distributed as number 1607. This question is currently
           the issue in another CFJ.  But by submitting this CFJ before
           the other CFJ has been decided, the Plantiff has forced this
           Judge to make his own determination of the facts in this issue.
           The relevant rules are 594/1 and 993/1.  In both of them we find
           the dread word "may".  This word has two generally accepted
           meanings in the English language the first roughly synonymous
           with "is allowed to" and the second roughly synonymous with
           "is required to".  Rejecting those cases where the permissive
           interpretation is assigned to one rule and the restrictive
           interpretation is assigned to the other, we are left with two
           cases to consider.  Under the permissive interpretation, anything
           meeting the other requirements for proposalhood would be a valid
           Proposal.  It would make these rules meaningless.  Thus we
           reject the permissive interpretation.  This leaves us with the
           restrictive interpretaion for both rules and we are forced to agree
           with the Promoter that under the current rules a Proposal must
           contain both a Rule Change and a Directive.  We will accept the
           Promoter's statement that the texts he had received did not meet
           this requirement as the Plantiff has not challenged it in his
           statement of the issues.



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

Evidence:

I.   Rule 1036
II.  Rule 1023 (excerpt)

I.   Rule 1036

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

----------------------------------------
II.   Rule 1023 (excerpt)

      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. 

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


Andre