====================================================================== CFJ 907 "Rule 114 should be interpreted such that if a Proposal contained one Rule Change which, if it took effect, would make it impossible to make arbitrary changes to the ruleset by some combination of player actions, and that Proposal also contained other Rule Changes that, if they took effect, would make unrelated changes, then if the Proposal were adopted, of the Rule Changes in the Proposal only that one would be prevented by Rule 114 from taking effect." ====================================================================== Judge: Andre Judgement: TRUE Eligible: Andre, Antimatter, Blob, Chuck, Crito, elJefe, favor, General Chaos, Harlequin, KoJen, Macross, Michael, Morendil, Murphy, Oerjan, Steve, Swann, Vanyel Not eligible: Caller: Zefram Barred: - On hold: - ====================================================================== History: Called by Zefram, Fri, 7 Mar 1997 22:23:10 +0000 (GMT) Assigned to Andre, Mon, 10 Mar 1997 10:32:58 +0000 Judged TRUE, Sun, 16 Mar 1997 18:50:39 +0100 (MET) Published, Mon, 17 Mar 1997 12:29:01 +0000 ====================================================================== Judgement: TRUE Reasons and arguments: Rule 114 says that the change that would cause the Ruleset to be in a type as is forbidden by 114, will not take place. Both Rule 594 and Game Custom specify that if a Proposal contains more than one Rule Change, each such a Rule Change is a separate change of the Rules. Therefore, Rule 114 possibly stops only a single Rule Change of a Proposal. ====================================================================== Injunction: I hereby make an Injunction as per Rule 789. Player(s) to whom it applies: the Rulekeepor Action(s) required: Annotate Rule 114 with the statement: Rule 114 should be interpreted such that if a Proposal contained one Rule Change which, if it took effect, would make it impossible to make arbitrary changes to the ruleset by some combination of player actions, and that Proposal also contained other Rule Changes that, if they took effect, would make unrelated changes, then if the Proposal were adopted, of the Rule Changes in the Proposal only that one would be prevented by Rule 114 from taking effect. and a list of Rules consisting of Rule 114 and Rule 594. ====================================================================== (Caller's) Arguments: The Relevant Rules are 114 and 594. Rule 594 states that "[i]f a Proposal containing Rule Changes is adopted, the Rule Changes contained in the Proposal shall take effect in the order in which they appear in the Proposal". In the case of a Proposal containing more than one Rule Change, this clearly requires there to be a sequence of discrete changes to the gamestate, namely the sequence of Rule Changes. In the scenario suggested by the Statement, only one of these changes to the gamestate would cause 114's condition to become false. 114 would thus prevent that one change to the gamestate from occurring, but it makes no claim to have any effect on the other Rule Changes. Therefore, only that single Rule Change would be affected by Rule 114. ======================================================================