============================== CFJ 1266 ==============================
1. That of the following two messages,
http://www.escribe.com/games/agora-business/m2255.html exactly ONE
legally registered Goethe as a player in the game of Agora. The
other one is either incorrect or superfluous. 2. That at a time 1
minute immediately BEFORE the SEND date listed in Goethe's e-mail
header for m2253, normalized to GMT as Feb 5 0:22:49 (anecdotal
evidence available on request), Goethe unambiguously was NOT a
player. 3. That at a time 1 minute immediately AFTER the latest
distribution date of m2255 listed in e-scribe, normalized to GMT as
Feb 5 as 1:19:24, Goethe unambiguously WAS a player. 4. That, from
these time indications, rounding to the minute, Goethe's Window of
Ambiguity of Status as Player (GWASP) extends ABSOLUTELY NO LONGER
than between GMT 0:21:00 and GMT 1:21:00 on Feb 5, 2001. 5. That
Goethe's instant of becoming a player lies unambiguously within es
GWASP. 5. While judgements on timestamps or the legality of the
first message (c.f.
http://www.escribe.com/games/agora-official/m967.html) may narrow
the extent of this GWASP, no judgement may extend it. 6.
Therefore, irrespective of the EXACT moment of Goethe's
registration, and independent of any decisions further refining the
exact moment, any game events, payments or adjustments, mandated by
the rules to occur to Goethe's status, which must happen WITHIN a
time period following registration, must use a registration date for
Goethe NO LATER THAN 1:21:00 Feb. 5, 2001 in determining time of
occurrence. 7. Likewise, any game events, payments, or adjustments
mandated by the rules to occur a certain time AFTER Goethe's
registration must use a registration date for Goethe NO EARLIER THAN
0:21:00 Feb. 5, 2001 in determining its time of occurrence.
Called by G.: 06 Feb 2001 22:21:39 GMT
Assigned to Crito: 07 Feb 2001 08:24:13 GMT
Dismissed by Crito: 07 Feb 2001 15:03:55 GMT
Appealed by Kelly: 08 Feb 2001 05:57:18 GMT
Appealed by Ziggy: 08 Feb 2001 06:07:33 GMT
Appealed by lee: 08 Feb 2001 13:29:09 GMT
Appealed by Maud: 09 Feb 2001 04:15:15 GMT
Appeal 1266a: 09 Feb 2001 04:15:15 GMT
SUSTAINED on Appeal: 17 Feb 2001 02:12:29 GMT
Judge Crito's Arguments:
In the matter of CFJ 1266, I draw attention to the following
Rule 1563/1 (Power=1)
Statement of a CFJ
In order to be Judged, a Call for Judgement must contain a
single clearly-labeled Statement which must be able to be
determined by the means of logical reasoning, with the
presumption of perfect knowledge, to be either TRUE or FALSE.
Statements which are inherently contradictory or which are
vacuous are not acceptable, and a CFJ containing such a
Statement shall not be Judged.
If a CFJ fails to meet the requirements of this or of other
rules it lacks standing and is to be dismissed.
Since the multiple Statements were presented to me as a single
CFJ, I find I have no choice but to dismiss it based on R1563.
I hereby DISMISS CFJ 1266.
I agree with Blob, the wording of Goethe's message really makes
this a series of CFJs, not a single one. I haven't made up my
mind whether the disposition of CFJ 1266 puts an end to this
or whether it is the case that Wes, in fact, has not yet distributed
Goethe's CFJs. Thoughts?