Tom Ogas on 2 May 2002 16:35:52 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: [nbo] Proposal Marsh.1, Marsh.2

Judicial Review 1
Re:  Marsh.1

I have accepted appointment as Judge.

> VotingDefinition (Law 2.3), says, and I quote, "Players have 4 days from the
> date the Proposal was Published, with which to Vote on the Proposal;"  which
> implies that no proposal can be Ratified until 4 days have passed from it
> being Published.  [true, false, null?]

Rule 2.5, "A Proposal is Ratified, if it receives the necessary number of For
Votes as indicated by the RuleSet within the time allowed to by the RuleSet"

Mr Marsh proported to propose a law and thereby voted FOR it.  He then concluded
that since there was 1 vote for the proposed law and no votes against at the time
of his submission of law that it was automatically ratified.

While I commend Mr. Marsh for his attempt to exploit a "loophole" in the rules so
early in the game, this attempt was founded on an improper review of Law 2.5. 
Mr. Marsh failed to read the entire rule which clearly states "...within the time
allowed to by the RuleSet."

As Mr. Dickens correctly states, Law 2.3 sets the "time allowed to" vote at 4

Mr. Marsh may argue that Article 4 would take precidence over Law 2.3, however,
that would only occur if there existed a conflict between the two rules.  There
is no conflict.
Thus my answer to the question is TRUE.  

Proposal Marsh.1 is still be open for a vote by all members of the Nomic.  It
will be ratified or defeated depending on the votes submitted within 4 days after
it's submission to the Nomic.

In accordance with Law 1.3, Marsh.2 cannot be submitted because Marsh.1 is still
open for vote.  Marsh.2 must be tabled and resubmitted at a later date by the

> Editorial note:
> BTW, the "loophole" to give points is there on purpose so that if the Nomic
> wanted to "reward" some nifty player it could, but it couldn't hurt.

Judge's Footnote:
Article 2.6 clearly states that "No Rule may penalize a Player or Players by
name."  However, players can be rewarded by name.  This judge encourages a player
to propose an article or amend Article 2 that closes this loophole, otherwise any
clever player (perhaps even this judge) who can discover the means may award
himself/herself 100 points and automatically win the game.

-- Judge Tom Ogas

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness

[-- brought to you by --]
[- for now -]
[----- please, remember to trim the quotes -------]