[CFJ 24: Players must obey the Rules even in out-of-game actions.]

[CFJ 825 (called 7 November 1995): Players must obey the Rules even if
no Rule says so.]

[CFJ 1848 (called 21 December 2007): The game must operate according
to the rules that prevail at the time, and not attempt to incorporate
any retroactive changes made in the future.]

[CFJ 1709 (called 26 July 2007): The rules are binding on all those
who play the game in the broader sense, regardless of whether they
have the rule-defined status of "player".]

[CFJ 1132: A Player failing to perform a duty required by the Rules
within a reasonable time may be in violation of the Rules, even if the
Rules do not provide a time limit for the performance of that duty.]

[CFJ 1488 (called 11 February 2004): Engineering a situation in which
other players are unable to follow a particular rule is not in itself
a violation of that rule.]

[CFJ 1856 (called 29 December 2007): The requirement that "no
interpretation of Agoran law may abridge ... a person's defined
rights" means that it must be feasible, given the practical limits of
Agoran evidence-gathering, to remain reasonably sure that a person's
defined rights are not being limited.]

[CFJ 1768 (called 22 October 2007): The right of participation in the
fora is the right to participate in them for their intended purposes,
and is not necessarily infringed by regulations regarding the manner
and type of participation.]

[CFJ 1738 (called 29 August 2007): An obligation on a player to not
publish statements that e believes are true would conflict with the
right of participation in the fora.]

[CFJ 1753 (called 28 September 2007): The right to cease playing
applies only to those who have the rule-defined status of "player",
not to those who play the game in the broader sense without having
that official status.]

[CFJs 1911-1914 (called 18 March 2008): Physical realities supersede
the Rules by default.]

[CFJ 2101 (called 20 July 2008): Consent to join a binding agreement
implies consent to join later agreements created through currently
existing rule-defined processes.]

[CFJ 2220 (called 11 October 2008): Consent to join a binding
agreement may be an effect of another action, such as joining a
foreign nomic, as long as the action is triggered by free will and the
actor is reasonably aware of the effect.]

[CFJ 2246 (called 30 October 2008): Joining a contract does not imply
consent to be acted on behalf of simply because the contract might be
amended in the future to allow it.]

[CFJ 2264 (called 11 November 2008): The right to refuse to become
party to an agreement does not apply to amendments to existing
agreements.]

[CFJ 2361 (called 26 January 2009): The withholding of a reward for
doing something may or may not constitute a penalty for not doing it,
depending on the circumstances.]

[CFJ 2395 (called 1 March 2009): Even without this being explicitly
specified in the rules, it is possible for a non-player to violate a
rule by missing a deadline.]

[CFJ 2410 (called 11 March 2009): Consent to join a binding agreement
may be given privately.]

[CFJ 2761 (called 7 February 2010): The termination of a contract
through processes it explicitly envisions (including a rule-defined
mechanism, if the contract is intended to be governed under Agoran
law) is akin to a natural death, and does not generally constitute a
restriction of its rights as a person.]

[CFJ 1139: Interpretations [judgements at the time of CFJ 1139] need
not necessarily accord with the reasoning and arguments of Judges or
Justices given in past CFJs.]

[CFJ 1104 (called 20 August 1998): The presence in a Rule of deference
clause, claiming that the Rule defers to another Rule, does not
prevent a conflict with the other Rule arising, but shows only how the
Rule says that conflict is to be resolved when it does arise.]

[CFJs 1114-1115 (called 27 January 1999): This Rule is to be applied
to resolve Rule conflicts on a case-by-case basis; just because a Rule
is inapplicable in one situation due to conflict with a Rule of higher
precedence does not mean that the Rule is nullified in all cases.]

[CFJ 708 (called October 1994): An Amendment of a non-existing Rule is
not a legal Rule Change.]

[CFJ 1625 (called 1 April 2007): Where a proposal specifies a rule to
amend by both number and title, and the number and title given
identify different rules, this constitutes ambiguity that nullifies
the attempted rule change.]

[CFJ 1644 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form
of words "Change the power of rule NNNN to P and amend it by XXX.",
where XXX specifies a text change, this constitutes two attempted rule
changes.]

[CFJ 1638 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form
of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX.  Amend rule NNNN by YYY.", this
constitutes two separate attempts at rule changes, even though both
attempt to amend the same rule.]

[CFJ 1642 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form
of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX.  Further amend rule NNNN by YYY.",
where both XXX and YYY specify text changes, this constitutes two
separate attempts at rule changes.]

[CFJ 1640 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form
of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX and YYY.", where both XXX and YYY
specify text changes, this constitutes a single attempt at a rule
change, even though it is specified in two parts.]

[CFJ 1641 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form
of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX and by YYY.", where both XXX and YYY
specify text changes, this constitutes a single attempt at a rule
change, even though it is specified in two parts.]

[CFJ 1643 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal specifies a single
rule amendment in two parts, and one of the parts is not possible but
the other is possible, the possible part is applied alone.]

[CFJ 2201 (called 30 September 2008): The permission required by Rule
105 need not be explicit.]

[CFJs 2184-2192 (called 24 September 2008): A message signature
containing a unique nickname is not a self-ratifying claim that its
publisher is distinct from other generally-recognized persons.]

[CFJ 2300 (called 5 December 2008): The Executor of a public message
is not necessarily a person who took action at the time the message
was sent.]

[CFJ 2325 (called 5 January 2009): Only the selection of a nickname
for the purposes of Agora is relevant to this rule.]

[CFJs 1790-1791 (called 11 November 2007): The self-ratifying asset
report is the complete list of ownerships of assets of that class; a
partial list does not self-ratify.]

[CFJ 1850 (called 22 December 2007): The general ability of the
recordkeepor to create assets does not include an ability to determine
who possesses them when created, so they are necessarily owned by the
Lost and Found Department [at the time of CFJ 1850, the Bank] upon
creation.]

[CFJ 1910 (called 10 March 2008): When an existing entity is defined
as an asset, the change of its owner from "undefined" to the Lost and
Found Department [Bank at the time of CFJ 1910] counts as a transfer,
and fails if the Lost and Found Department is outside of the class of
objects that can own the entity.]

[CFJ 2176 (called 22 September 2008): Entities may be fungible even if
not defined as such by this rule.]

[CFJ 2309 (called 11 December 2008): If two separate documents attempt
to define an asset with the same name, they refer to the same entity,
but the entity is not an asset.]

[CFJ 3016 (called 30 April 2011): "CAN recreate" means "CAN once
recreate".]

[CFJ 712: Referring to a Player by a method other than eir name or
nickname is acceptable, as long as it is unambiguous.]

[CFJ 1861 (called 8 January 2008): A player's legal name (legal in eir
country of residence) is not necessarily an acceptable way to refer to
em.]

[CFJ 1782 (called 4 November 2007): Referring to a player by the name
of an office that e holds suffices to identify em uniquely as a
person, if there is no doubt regarding who holds that office.]

[CFJ 1460 (called 4 April 2003): Extremely complex synonyms, requiring
extensive effort to interpret correctly, can constitute a sufficient
degree of unclarity as to render the message ineffective.]

[CFJ 1840 (called 20 December 2007): A proper noun that has not been
explicitly defined does not adequately refer to any entity, and is not
implicitly defined by the context in which it is used.]

[CFJ 1580 (called 12 January 2006): Base64 encoding of (part of) a
message, other than in the context of MIME with appropriate headers,
can render a message ineffective for unclarity, because the decoding
step requires unreasonable effort within the meaning of CFJ 1460.]

[CFJ 1741 (called 11 September 2007): HTML encoding (including
numerical character entity encoding) does not render a message
ineffective for unclarity if a suitable MIME type is indicated by a
header.]

[CFJ 1741 (called 11 September 2007): An email message does not need
the RFC-required "MIME-Version:" header in order for it to be
interpreted in the MIME way.]

[CFJ 1536 (called 13 March 2005): The phrase "AOL!" is not a
sufficiently clear synonym for "Me too!".]

[CFJ 1770 (called 23 October 2007): A contract can redefine a
rule-defined term in its own way, and the contract's definition will
then apply in situations governed by the contract.]

[CFJ 1885 (called 26 January 2008): A word or phrase can acquire a
meaning by custom, provided that it is a reasonable meaning and does
not unreasonably change the meaning of phrases that already have a
meaning.]

[CFJ 1831 (called 10 December 2007): Mentioning a URI, without
surrounding text stating its significance, does not incorporate
anything identified by that URI into the message that mentions the
URI.]

[CFJ 1831 (called 10 December 2007): Character sequences within a URI
by default have no significance other than their functional role as
part of the URI.]

[CFJ 2258 (called 6 November 2008): Changes in whitespace are also
inconsequential.]

[CFJs 2120-2121 (called 4 August 2008): A requirement of the form
'within <time limit>, a player SHALL <action> by announcement' means
that the player CAN perform the action, and SHALL do so within the
time limit.]

[CFJ 2230 (called 16 October 2008): In a statement of the form "an
action that X may take", 'may' generally means 'might', i.e. CAN.]

[CFJ 2282 (called 19 November 2008): To state that an entity "MUST"
have certain properties refers to possibility, not legality.]

[CFJ 2414 (called 14 March 2009): A rule of the form "X SHOULD be
interpreted as Y" does not allow players to bypass the interpretation
by failing to perform the described action.]

[CFJs 1451-1452 (called 6 March 2003): A message that is split into
multiple email messages can qualify as a single message for game
purposes, if it is obvious how to combine the parts to reconstruct the
single message.]

[CFJ 752 (called 13 March 1995): Something sent to a Player who is
obligated to send it to all Players is sufficient for sending
something to the PF.]

[CFJ 813 (called 22 October 1995): A Player need not prove that e can
receive the PF.]

[CFJ 831 (called 10 November 1995): The Date: header of a message is
not necessarily the time at which the message takes effect.]

[CFJ 2205 (called 2 October 2008): A message takes effect at exactly
one of the times date-stamped on it; selecting which one is a matter
of game custom.]

[CFJ 2212 (called 7 October 2008): An IRC channel is a forum.]

[CFJ 2211 (called 7 October 2008): It is generally possible for an IRC
channel to be a public forum.

[CFJ 2214 (called 7 October 2008): Some IRC messages, such as NICK,
are sent to all members of an IRC channel but are not sent via that
channel.]

[CFJ 866 (called 8 April 1996): A message is "received" when the
message enters the recipient's normal technical domain of control,
whether this be eir private machine or eir private account on a shared
machine (but not the shared machine itself, if the recipient does not
control it).]

[CFJ 1112: In order to submit a Proposal, in the sense of R1865 and
elsewhere, it is not sufficient that a collection of text 'with the
clear indication that that text is intended to become a Proposal'
(R1483) merely be sent to the Public Forum by a Proposing Entity; the
collection of text must also be received in the Public Forum.]

[CFJ 1314 (called 15 August 2001): If a message sent to a public forum
is rejected by the list moderator, it still qualifies as having been
sent via a public forum.]

[CFJ 1905 (called 7 February 2008): Regardless of CFJ 1314, a message
has not been sent via a forum until most persons who have arranged to
receive messages via the forum receive it.]

[CFJ 1888 (called 31 January 2008): Sending a message to a Discussion
Forum, or other mailing list except for a Public Forum, does not
qualify as sending it to all players.]

[CFJ 1631 (called 29 April 2007): Public announcements must be made in
the message body; the subject line is insignificant.]

[CFJ 1784 (called 5 November 2007): An undescriptive or misleading
subject line does not deprive the message body of effect.]

[CFJ 1880 (called 22 January 2008): A phrase that would, in the
message body, cancel the effect of the rest of the message, does not
have such an effect if it appears in the subject line.]

[CFJ 1761 (called 30 September 2007): Publishing part of a message is
a different action from publishing the whole message.]

[CFJ 1646 (called 30 April 2007): The act of "publishing" or
"announcing" is accomplished when the message has left the sender's
technical domain of control, indicated by one of the "Received:"
headers.]

[CFJ 1695 (called 23 June 2007): A partnership, which by its nature
can't directly send email, can participate in the fora by means of its
members sending messages on its behalf, if its governing agreement
says so.]

[CFJ 1719 (called 12 August 2007): A player can, if e intends, have
public messages sent on eir behalf, including via a web form that
allows all-comers to send messages on eir behalf without specific
approval.]

[CFJs 1833-1834 (called 18 December 2007): A player can, by
contractual arrangement, grant another player the capacity to act by
announcement on eir behalf.]

[CFJ 1893 (called 3 February 2008): A non-consensual non-contractual
arrangement cannot grant a player the capacity to act by announcement
on behalf of another.]

[CFJ 2397 (caled 3 March 2009): A player can grant or revoke
permission at will for another player to act by announcement on eir
behalf.]

[CFJ 2322 (called 24 December 2008): The ability to act on behalf can
be created by any willful agreement.]

[CFJ 1336 (called 13 December 2001): A public statement that one
wishes to perform an action that one can perform by announcement can
constitute an announcement that performs that action.]

[CFJ 1621 (called 8 February 2007): Where an action can be performed
by announcement, announcing that one deems something to be the case
that would result from that action does not constitute performing the
action.]

[CFJ 1584 (called 24 February 2006), CFJ 1728 (called 20 August 2007):
Saying "I do X 1000 times", where X is something that can be done by
announcement, is an acceptable shorthand for 1000 instances of "I do
X", but this shorthand cannot be used with an infinite repeat count,
because it is impossible to write out an infinite number of instances
of "I do X".]

[CFJ 1774 (called 1 November 2007): Saying "I do X 10000 times", where
X is something that can be done by announcement, does not necessarily
achieve 10000 instances of X, if writing out 10000 instances of "I do
X" would be a substantial effort such that using the shorthand is
abusive.  The presumption is in favour of the shorthand being
successful.]

[CFJ 1775 (called 1 November 2007): If an announcement of the form "I
do X N times" is not be acceptable shorthand for N instances of "I do
X", then the announcement is completely nullified, and does not have
the effect of M instances of "I do X" for any non-zero repeat count
M.]

[CFJ 1730 (called 22 August 2007): An appropriate announcement will
accomplish an action even if its author believed the action was
impossible.]

[CFJ 1841 (called 20 December 2007): A message-based action cannot be
retroactive.]

[CFJ 1971 (called 22 May 2008): An announcement with a general
disclaimer as to its contents cannot fulfill a requirement to report
information, but it may successfully cause game actions to be taken if
the actions do not depend on the truth value of the disclaimed
contents.]

[CFJ 2133 (called 9 August 2008): A disclaimed statement cannot cause
an action to be taken by announcement.]

[CFJ 2112 (called 23 July 2008): An action is only taken by
announcement if the Rules define it as such; e.g., posting an
objection to a dependent action is not an action taken by
announcement.]

[CFJ 2151 (called 5 September 2008): Some unregulated actions, such as
celebrating and revealing things, can be taken by announcement.]

[CFJ 2086 (called 15 July 2008): Message-based actions are always
taken in some order, never precisely simultaneously, possibly unless
otherwise stated.]

[CFJ 2179 (called 23 September 2008): An message-based action can be
taken even if its sender cannot be identified.]

[CFJ 2221 (called 13 October 2008): When an action is specified as
"can do X in order to do Y", and a player does X without specifying
intent to do Y, e does not do Y.]

[CFJ 2238 (called 22 October 2008): The requirement of unambiguous
specification applies to the parameters of an action.]

[CFJ 2363 (called 1 February 2009): "X can do Y by doing Z" does not
imply that X can do Z.]

[CFJ 2441 (called 6 April 2009): Due to a limitation of the mailing
list archives, attaching a message with a particular text does not
count as publishing that text.]

[CFJ 3025 (called 15 May 2011): If it is clear what he did, then it
must be clear what he did; if it is not clear what he did, then it is
not clear what he did.]

[CFJ 3106 (called 19 October 2011): When a person announces that "e
performs" an action, the referent of "e" (i.e. eir identity) must be
clear.]

[CFJ 3002 (called 19 April 2011): A message of the form "This
statement causes [action]" is ineffective as a way to perform
[action], and may be an attempt to act on behalf of the statement.]

[CFJ 2899 (called 12 November 2010): A player's real name does not
necessary identify em.]

[CFJs 1790-1791 (called 11 November 2007): A challenge to any part of
a self-ratifying document prevents ratification of all parts of it.]

[CFJs 1852-1853 (called 23 December 2007): Claiming to submit more
votes than ones voting limit on the decision does not constitute the
making of a false statement.]

[CFJs 1673-1675 (called 20 May 2007): Quorum for an Agoran decision is
determined at the time the vote collector makes the calculations
described in Rule 955.]

[CFJs 1673-1675 (called 20 May 2007): Quorum for an Agoran decision
changes as the set of eligible voters changes.]

[CFJs 1758-1759 (called 30 September 2007): If Assessorship changes
hands, vote collection duties move with it.]

[Cross-references (1 March 2008): the Assessor's duties are:
  * vote collector for proposals (Rule 106)]

[CFJs 1692-1693 (called 20 June 2007): A CFJ can be unambiguously
referenced by using the customarily-assigned sequence numbers, even if
the number was not assigned in the public forum, provided that those
involved accept it as unambiguous at the time.]

[CFJ 1355 (called 28 April 2002): Titles for CFJs are unregulated, so
it is possible for a title to be assigned to a CFJ informally.]

[Cross-references (28 May 2008): the Clerk of the Courts' duties
are:
  * not assign judges during holiday (Rule 1769)
  * report open judicial cases (Rule 991)
  * manage ID numbers of non-appeal judicial cases (Rule 991)
  * refuse excess CFJ (Rule 2175)
  * assign judge to judicial case (Rule 1868)
  * not assign a poorly qualified judge (Rule 1868)
  * track player posture (Rule 1871)
  * rotate the bench (Rule 1871)
  * recuse tardy judge (Rule 2158)]

[CFJs 1857-1858 (called 31 December 2007): Ignorance of the law is not
appropriate grounds for a verdict of UNAWARE.]

[CFJ 1804 (called 19 November 2007): A verdict of EXCUSED is
appropriate where a person mistakenly, in good faith, believes that
eir action is legal when it is not.]

[CFJs 1808-1809 (called 28 November 2007): Sentencing a ninny to
"APOLOGY" without explicitly giving a set of prescribed words
constitutes sentencing the ninny to APOLOGY with the empty set of
prescribed words.]

[CFJ 1846 (called 20 December 2007): For the purposes of prescribed
words, words do not need to be a standard part of the language.]

[CFJ 1924 (called 10 April 2008): A duration need not be a fixed
amount of time.]

[CFJ 3126 (called 19 November 2011): Committing an action defined as a
Crime is a violation of the rule so defining it.]

[CFJ 3128 (called 19 November 2011): An allegation that a person
committed a crime, mentioning the rule that defines the crime, is an
allegation that e violated that rule.]

[CFJ 1186: The Clerk of the Courts is required by Rule 1868 to select
a Judge who is qualified ["eligible" at the time of CFJ 1186] at the
time that the Judge is selected, regardless of whether that Player was
qualified at the time that the CFJ was actually called for or when the
identity of that Player is announced.]

[CFJ 3009 (called 24 April 2011): An entity poorly qualified to judge
a case is necessarily qualified to judge that case.]

      CFJ annotations that do not currently apply to any specific
      rules, but are likely to do so in the future, at which point
      they can be reattached.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Contracts / Binding Agreements

[CFJ 1892 (called 2 February 2008): An agreement that is not binding
is thereby not a contract.]

[CFJ 1901 (called 4 February 2008): An agreement that is binding is
thereby a contract, even if it doesn't impose any obligations.]

[CFJ 1892 (called 2 February 2008): An agreement's text can disclaim
contract/binding status, thereby nullifying itself, by explicitly
describing itself as a non-contract or as non-binding.]

[CFJ 1872 (called 15 January 2008): Being a player is not a
prerequisite for becoming party to a contract.]

[CFJ 1796 (called 14 November 2007): If a person announces that e
agrees to be bound by a particular text as a contract, without saying
who this agreement is with, and the contract text does not regulate
who can become a party to it, then any person can become a party to
the contract by announcement.]

[CFJ 1455 (called 14 March 2003): A contract cannot cause an
otherwise-insignificant action by a non-party to constitute consent to
be bound by the contract.]

[CFJ 1856 (called 29 December 2007): A contract is null and void if
the courts do not have sufficient evidence that a person's
contract-related rights (in Rule 101) are not being infringed.  This
includes evidence that the party to the contract has reviewed the
rules and has direct prior knowledge of the fora.]

[CFJ 1686 (called 7 June 2007): A person who is not a party to an
agreement categorically cannot violate it.]

[CFJ 1752 (called 28 September 2007): Deregistration does not
implicitly cause the ex-player to leave a contract.]

[CFJ 1842 (called 20 December 2007): A contract may use retroactive
operations internally for the purposes of determining obligations of
the parties, but such legal fictions do not affect Agora as a whole.]

[CFJ 1836 (called 18 December 2007): A contract cannot have
retroactive effect.]

[CFJ 1843 (called 20 December 2007): Becoming a party to a contract
cannot occur retroactively, for the purposes of determining
justiciability of the contract.]

[CFJ 1816 (called 2 December 2007): A contract is not generally able
to define terms used by the rules.]

[CFJ 1819 (called 3 December 2007): A contract is not able to create
new ways of winning the game.]

[CFJ 1835 (called 18 December 2007): An authorisation granted by a
party in a contract takes precedence over a unilateral statement by
that party that purports to cancel that authorisation.]

[CFJ 1921 (called 2 April 2008): Agreements with informal phrasing can
be considered contracts, but only when made in a medium where lying is
against the Rules (i.e. a public forum).]

[CFJ 2302 (called 7 December 2008): The scope of the text of a
contract is limited compared to that of a rule; in particular, a
contract cannot cause a paradox by setting undecidable conditions on
joining it.]

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

Truthfulness

[CFJ 1739 (called 29 August 2007): A quotation can result in a
violation of Rule 2215 (then 2149), depending on the context of the
rest of the message.]

[CFJ 1849 (called 21 December 2007): Violation of Rule 2215 (then
2149) can occur without any intent to misdirect.]

[CFJ 1887 (called 30 January 2008): Publicly making the statement
"This statement is a lie." would most likely be a violation of rule
2215 (then 2149), because it is logically indeterminate and so making
it would not be telling the truth, and its logical indeterminacy would
be understood by any reasonable player.]

[CFJ 2103 (called 21 July 2008): Making the statement "I lie." is not
a violation of Rule 2215 if the author is lying down.]

[CFJ 2399 (called 4 March 2009): Even if a type of behavior is likely
to cause false statements to be accidentally published, a person does
not violate Rule 2215 by engaging in it if there is no specific
statement e believes is false.]

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

Miscellaneous

[CFJ 2276a (called 20 November 2008): When a rule allows, as an
action, a quantity to be increased which is defined elsewhere as a
fixed value, and that action is taken, the rule thereby redefines the
quantity as one more than it would otherwise be.]

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