From owner-nomic-official@teleport.com  Fri Feb  2 08:49:24 1996
Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by Shamino.quincy.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA25194 for <blahedo@quincy.edu>; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 08:49:23 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA00536; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 06:41:03 -0800
Received: by desiree.teleport.com (bulk_mailer v1.3); Fri, 2 Feb 1996 06:41:02 -0800
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id GAA00515 for nomic-official-outgoing; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 06:41:02 -0800
Received: from wing1.wing.rug.nl (wing1.wing.rug.nl [129.125.21.1]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA00468 for <nomic-official@teleport.com>; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 06:40:56 -0800
Message-Id: <199602021440.GAA00468@desiree.teleport.com>
Received: by wing1.wing.rug.nl
	(1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA19038; Fri, 2 Feb 1996 15:39:35 +0100
From: Andre Engels <csg419@wing.rug.nl>
Subject: OFF: CFJ 853 Judgement: TRUE
To: nomic-official@teleport.com
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 96 15:39:34 MET
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com
Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

======================================================================
			ASSIGNMENT CFJ 853

 "Rule 113 should be interpreted such that it does 
  not allow a Player to deregister retroactively."

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

Judge:		Andre
Judgement:	TRUE

Eligible:	Andre, Chuck, elJefe, favor, Jtael, Kelly, KoJen, 
		Murphy, Steve, Vanyel, Vlad
		Morendil (if a Player)

Not Eligible:	
Caller:		Wes
Barred:		
On Hold:	Blob, Dave Bowen
1005:		Michael, Pascal, Swann

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

History:
  Called by Wes, 26 January 1996, 23:35 -0800 (PST)
  Assigned to Andre, 29 January 1996, 12:52 MET
  Judged TRUE by Andre, 2 February 1996, 15:38 MET

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

Requested Injunction: 
We respectfully request that the Judge Annotate Rule 113 with this
Statement, with the sole Relevant Rule being 113. 

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

Injunction:
I require the Rulekeepor to annotate Rule 113 with the Statement of
this CFJ and a list of relevant Rules consisting of Rule 113 alone.y

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

Arguments: 
There is one key word in Rule 113 that nobody has seemed to notice:
"or". There are *two* options available to exercise Rule 113: (a) The
Player may Deregister to avoid being awarded a game penalty. Said
Deregistration would need to be done before said penalty was applied.
This still works to avoid earlier penalties, or at least the effects
thereof, due to a *second* option: (b) The Player may Deregister
"rather than continue to play." That is, rather than continue to play
under the effects of a game penalty, or for any other reason. 
[See exhibit 1] 

It is also worth nothing that the intended effect of Rule 113 is not an
issue here. It has been Amended once since it's inception, and this
Amendment may have been flawed, resulting in a Rule which cannot a
particular penalty from being awarded if the Player has no prior knowledge 
of the penalty. This may be bad, or perhaps not, since the Player can
still deregister if e wishes as soon as e finds out about the penalty. 
[See exhibit 2]

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

Decision & Reasoning Judge:

I judge this CFJ to be TRUE.

Rule 113 allows deregistration, not any specific type of deregistration,
such as retroactive deregistration. Thus retroactive deregistration would
only be allowed by Rule 113 in cases where retroactive deregistration would
cause a Player not to continue play or foreit a Game penalty, while
non-retroactive deregistration would not have that effect.

Well, it is clear that non-retroactive deregistration has the effect of
not continuing play, so retroactive deregistration is not necessary for
that. Now the case of incurring a Game Penalty. If the Penalty has been
incurred between the wished retroactive time of deregistration and the time
at which retroactively is deregistered, then the Penalty has already been
incurred, and deregistering, even retroactively, will not stop that. If the
Penalty has not been incurred yet, normal deregistration again suffices.

Two things must be noted, however:
1. The fact that this is TRUE is not solely the effect of Rule 113. If
   we had any Rules which could make a Player incur a Penalty at the time
   e deregisters or later, then retroactive deregistration would be allowed
2. Even though Rule 113 does not allow retroactive deregistration, chances
   are Rule 116 does do 

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

Evidence:  (emphasis added to actual text in some places) 
Exhibit 1 - 
"A Player may always deregister from the Game rather than continue to
play _or_ forfeit a Game penalty..." [Rule 113] 

Exhibit 2 - 
"All Players must always abide by all the Rules then in effect, _in the
form in which they are then in effect_..." [Rule 101] 
----------

Here's to hoping that the "Crisis" never happened.