============================== CFJ 1583 ==============================
Sherlock played Corporate Bankruptcy on February 10th, 2006.
Called by Sherlock: 24 Feb 2006 19:37:36 GMT
Assigned to Taral: 27 Feb 2006 02:20:54 GMT
Judged FALSE by Taral: 06 Mar 2006 21:24:25 GMT
Goethe argues that I did not satisfy R2106, which states:
A gambler plays a card with an Exploit by announcement,
specifying the card to be played, indicating any entities or
values mentioned in an Indication of the card's Exploit, and
noting any fees required to play the card. A card without an
Exploit cannot be played.
I would contest this, however. Fees were nowhere defined in the
ruleset at the time, so I don't believe the rules either enabled or
required me to pay any. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a fee
as "a sum paid or charged for a service". Without a better definition
provided by the rules, I think we have to believe that R2106 means a fee
of this type. Since no other rules define a process for paying or
charging an amount for a service, what amount would I have been
"required" to note?
Judge Taral's Arguments:
At the time of the CFJ, the card "Corporate Bankruptcy" was defined thus:
* Caption: Corporate Bankruptcy
Elements: Limited [Shareholders] , Costly 
Exploit: Transfer each Stock Card not held by the deck to
And the "Costly" element defined thus:
* Costly [X a natural number]: There is a fee of X to play this
card, in addition to any other fees.
This definitively states that there is a fee, and one can reasonably
assume that, regardless of what definition one selects for the word
"fee", the same definition must be used for both R2106 and this
element. The possibility that this fee might be otherwise without
effect does not negate the requirement to note its existence.
Therefore I find that there was a requirement to note a fee of 3 to
play the card, and that Sherlock failed to meet that requirement.