====================================================================== CFJ 916 "An Officer is required to take action on a message pertaining to the duties of eir office only if the message has been sent to either the Public Forum or the preferred e-mail address of said Officer, as listed in the Registrar's Report." ====================================================================== Judge: elJefe Judgement: FALSE Eligible: Andre, Antimatter, Blob, Chuck, elJefe, favor, General Chaos, Harlequin, KoJen, Macross, Michael, Morendil, Murphy, Steve, Swann, Vanyel, Zefram Not eligible: Caller: Crito Barred: - On hold: Oerjan ====================================================================== History: Called by Crito, Wed, 19 Mar 1997 11:00:22 -0500 Assigned to elJefe, Mon, 24 Mar 1997 10:00:07 +0000 Judged FALSE, Wed, 26 Mar 1997 20:17:09 +0000 Published, Tue, 1 Apr 1997 10:00:20 +0100 ====================================================================== Judgement: FALSE Reasons and arguments: There are several situations in the Rules in which a message requires an Officer to take some action. For example, Rule 1483/2 specifies that a Proposal comes into being when it is delivered to the Promotor, and Rule 1036/6 requires em to (among other things) assign it a number as soon as possible after receiving it. The Statement seeks to interpret 1036/6 (and others) as not requiring the action if the message came via a message to several people including the Officer, other than via the Public Forum. The caller's arguments refer to the notion that the Rules do not specifically mention other communications media. However, that in itself should not prevent a Player from delivering text (etc.) using other media, as per Rule 116. In fact the notion is not quite accurate, as it appears that Rule 718 explicitly recognizes the possibility of a message sent to more than one person, but not necessarily the Public Forum. In any case, a term (such as "message", "received", "delivered") not explicitly defined in the Rules retains its ordinary meaning as much as possible, and the Rules explicitly recognize that a message may be by "any medium or combination of media" as in Rule 478. As a sometime Officer myself, I sympathize with the idea behind this CFJ, in that an Officer who wishes to _ought_ to be able to delete nomic-discussion messages without risk of ignoring a legally effective message. However, legislation is required before the Statement could be considered true. ====================================================================== Evidence: Rule 718/4 (MI=1) Resignation from a Group A Player who is a Member of a Group shall be removed from the Jurisdiction of that Group's Ordinances when that Player sends a message to the Notary and the Vizier of that Group, indicating that e is resigning from that Group. The Ordinances of a Group are not permitted to prohibit a Player from sending such a message. This Rule does not in any way prevent a Player from being removed from the Jurisdiction of a Group's Ordinances by other means specified by the Rules or the Ordinances of that Group. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence History: ... Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, Oct. 21 1995 Amended(2) by Proposal 2563, Apr. 6 1996 Amended(3) by Proposal 2725, Oct. 23 1996 Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, Feb. 28 1997, substantial (unattributed) ====================================================================== (Caller's) Arguments: These are the only two communications media specifically recognized by the rules. As such, whenever the Rules state that an Officer must take action when a message has been sent to em, it is only possible to construe that a message has been legally sent if it has been sent via one of these two media. I note that Rule 478 refers to "any medium or combination of media", but only with respect to sending a message to the Public Forum. ======================================================================