============================== CFJ 2330 ==============================
On or about December 28, 2008, ais523 achieved a Win by Points.
Called by ais523: 07 Jan 2009 00:16:46 GMT
Assigned to harblcat: 08 Jan 2009 06:56:39 GMT
harblcat recused: 15 Jan 2009 08:12:36 GMT
Assigned to Wooble: 15 Jan 2009 08:29:26 GMT
Judged FALSE by Wooble: 16 Jan 2009 15:12:04 GMT
Up until now, I forgot that comex was in the chokey/had Rests (or did he
buy them all off? I can't remember), thus was prevented from winning.
I'm not entirely sure what difference that makes to the win, or to the
Judge Wooble's Arguments:
comex purported to make a number of contracts contests with emself at
the contestmaster 4 days after the start of the Holiday. The issue at
hand is whether R1769 is to be interpreted such that the intent to
perform a dependent action without objection can be announced after
the action has occurred during the holiday.
The relevant section of R1728 says a person CAN perform an action
dependently if, among other things:
b) A person (the initiator) announced intent to perform the
action, unambiguously and clearly specifying the action and
method(s) (including the value of N for each method), at
most fourteen days earlier, and (if the action depends on
objections) at least four days earlier.
and the portion of R1769 pertaining to timing of actions says:
If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given
time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the
72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that
action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends.
If some Rule bases the time of a future event (including the
time limit to perform an action) upon the time of another event,
a) that other event occurs during a Holiday, then the time at
which that Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose
of determining the time of the future event.
b) the future event would occur during a Holiday, then the
future event occurs 72 hours after the end of that Holiday
This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the
timing of events, and over all Rules which require events to be
performed before a specified time.
What does it mean for a Rule to require that an action be done prior
to a given time? R2152 stipulates that we SHOULD use it's definition
of "required", which is that failing to perform the described action
violates the rule in question. Performing an action dependently
without first announcing intent generally does not violate Rule 1728;
rather it is IMPOSSIBLE to perform the action in question. So the
first R1769 paragraph quoted above does not apply.
Now, does R1728 base the time of a future event upon the time of
another event? Arguably, yes. When you announce your intent to
perform a dependent action (the "other event"), we may say that the
time limit to perform that action (the "future event") is based on the
time the intent was announced. (It could be argued that there is in
fact no "time limit" created here since the person announcing the
intent is not required to perform the action at all, but this is a
shaky reading at best and won't be considered for the purposes of this
ruling.) In this case, the time limit would be 14 days after 28 Dec.,
or 11 Jan., which falls outside the Holiday.