- FT8 should not have been accepted by the Speaker as a special proposal, without risk to the proposer, under 402.
- FT8 should not have been accepted by the Speaker as a Fast Track Proposal by the Speaker.
- FT8 was correctly accepted as a Fast Track Proposal by the Speaker.
and supplied the following Rationale:
Clearly FT8 is trying to do more than just "clarifying ths situation." It has a clause, wich has nothing to do which Simon judged. 402 says that the Speaker may reject such proposals, I suggest that he should have done.
Further I believe that this proposal should not be legal under 402 at all, and that this kind of combined proposal should not be allowed to be made with out risk. My reasoning for this is under rule 401 "A Judgement may also be called for in the case where a player feels a rule is in contrast to the intention of the proposer."
Since I originally proposed 402 I feel that I should know that I intended these proposals, without risk, to fix the problem the Judgement was about and nothing else, if this is not what it says, then it is in contrast to my intentions, and should be changed.
The Judge selected was Ian Collier.
I find that:
If FT8 is a Proposal then the Speaker was entitled to accept it as a Fast-Track Proposal.
I phrase it in this odd way because to do otherwise would be to pre-judge J28. Of course, if FT8 is not a Proposal then trivially it is not a Fast-Track Proposal and should not have been accepted by the Speaker.
Rule 401(5) tells us that:A Judgement may also be called for in the case where a player feels a rule is in contrast to the intention of the proposer. If the Judge feels the rule should be corrected, a Fast-Track proposal should be used, if they exist.
This is clearly what happened in this case. There does not seem to be a restriction on the Fast-Track proposal which is made under this rule, though it could be argued that the Fast-Track proposal should be onewhich corrects the rule as dictated by what the player feels was the intention of the proposer. FT8 does this (as well as also carrying out an unrelated change).
Rule 402 does not come into play here. Even if it did, the reasoning would be much the same - and although "the Speaker may refuse to accept [the proposal] as Fast-Track if it involves more than just clarifying the situation", the Speaker is not forbidden from accepting it in such a case.