Subject: MN: Emergency Proposal 026

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 16:34:57 +0100 (BST)

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

Emergency Proposal 026 - What a Silly Shunt [Amendment]

{ Comments: The Proposal that amended the Shunting Rule carelessly neglected
to include the condition that the Shunter and Shuntee had to
have the same Line Code; this aims to fix it. Rather than just
adding another paragraph, I've reworked the criteria list.

Note that under the new Eprop Rules, all Players other than the
Proposer are eligible to Vote. Check Rule 0.7.2 if you need a
reminder on how Eprops work these days. }

In Rule 1.10.1 (A Shunting We Will Go) replace all up to the paragraph
beginning "Blocked Stations, closed Lines" with:-

If a Player with an LV greater than zero Moves to a Station that is
occupied by another Player, e can perform the Action "[Shunting <Player>
to <Station>]" to Shunt a Player from that Station to another Station
of the Actioning Player's choice (the "Target Station"), so long as the
following criteria are true:-

* There are 'n-1' Stations between the Target Station and the Shunted
Player's initial location (where 'n' is the Actioning Player's Line
Velocity), or there are less than 'n-1' Stations between it and the
Shunted Player's initial location, and it is also a Terminus Station.

* The Line Code of the Target Station is the same as one of the Lines
which serves the Shunted Player's initial location.

* The Shunted Player's Line Code is the same as that of the Actioning
Player.

* The Shunted Player's initial location is neither Dollis Hill nor a
Holy Station.

* The Target Station is not Mornington Crescent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raised by Kevan, 4:30pm 08/09/98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------