============================== CFJ 3207 ==============================
A proposal's title generally CAN be changed to be the same as
another proposal's title.
Called by omd: 05 May 2012 02:16:06 GMT
Assigned to FKA441344: 06 May 2012 18:29:26 GMT
Judged TRUE by FKA441344: 13 May 2012 17:38:30 GMT
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:02 PM, omd wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> The difference was that at the time of 1358, the rules didn't define
>> or specify what a proposal's title was at all, and now you have to
>> submit with the "associated title", so arguably that's a legislative
>> override of 1358, and the submitted title is the true title
>> nowadays. And saying "name != title" is a bit of a stretch; pretty
>> much synonymous for a body of text (and may break other things to
>> say it isn't). So the question is, does the more recent precedent
>> deal with that added bit? -G.
> Well, "Proposal 1234" is still a reasonable name, and proposal ID
> numbers are now explicitly mentioned (if not precisely defined).
> Under the theory that repealed rules can still influence game custom,
> Rule 2161 (ID Numbers) used to read:
> (d) If an instance of that type has an ID number, then its name
> is the combination of its type and ID number. Otherwise, it
> has no name.
> Actually, that might be what I was thinking of, rather than a precedent.
Judge FKA441344's Arguments:
Game custom indicates that the name of a proposal includes its ID
number, and different proposals generally have different ID numbers. I
therefore judge case 3207 TRUE.