Index ← 3756 CFJ 3757 3758 → text
===============================  CFJ 3757  ===============================

      omd has 1 Blot.

==========================================================================

Caller:                        Jason Cobb

Judge:                         Falsifian
Judgement:                     FALSE

==========================================================================

History:

Called by Jason Cobb:                             12 Jul 2019 01:14:27
Assigned to Falsifian:                            17 Jul 2019 23:43:44
Judged FALSE by Falsifian:                        21 Jul 2019 17:10:10

==========================================================================

Caller's Evidence:

Excerpt from Rule 2478 ("Vigilante Justice'):

>      When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate
>      the allegation and CAN, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the
>      investigation by:
>            
>      - Imposing the Cold Hand of Justice on the perp, as described
>        elsewhere; or
>            
>      - if e believes that no rules violation occurred or that it would
>        be ILLEGAL or INEFFECTIVE to levy a fine for it, announcing the
>        Finger Pointing to be Shenanigans.


Excerpt from Rule 2557 ("Removing Blots"):

>      When the rules authorize an investigator to impose the Cold Hand
>      of Justice for a violation, e CAN do so by levying a fine on the
>      perp with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 2x the base value of the
>      violation, within the following guidelines:
>            
>      - If the violation is described by the rules as a Class N crime,
>        then N is the base value; otherwise the base value is 2.
>            
>      - The fine SHOULD be reduced to the degree that the violation is a
>        minor, accidental, and/or inconsequential infraction.
>            
>      - The fine SHOULD be increased to the degree that the violation is
>        willful, profitable, egregious, or an abuse of an official
>        position.

Attempted imposition of the CHoJ by the Referee, R. Lee:

> This finger pointing is valid, I impose a fine on omd for failing to 
> judge
> CFJ 3752 in the allotted time. The crime is tardiness which has a 2-blot
> base value, but given that the finger was pointed just a day after the 
> time
> expired and I see no pattern of violations, I impose a fine of 1 blot.


Excerpt from Rule 2125:

>      An action is regulated if: (1) the Rules limit, allow, enable, or
>      permit its performance; (2) describe the circumstances under which
>      the action would succeed or fail; or (3) the action would, as part
>      of its effect, modify information for which some player is
>      required to be a recordkeepor.
>            
>      A Regulated Action CAN only be performed as described by the
>      Rules, and only using the methods explicitly specified in the
>      Rules for performing the given action.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Caller's Arguments:

    If the investigator of a Finger-pointing determines that a violation
    occurred, e certainly CAN impose the CHoJ under Rule 2478. The
    investigator, R. Lee, determined that a violation occurred in this
    instance, so e CAN impose the CHoJ.

    Because R. Lee is authorized to impose the CHoJ, under Rule 2557, e
    CAN levy a fine on omd.

    Levying a fine is a regulated action by Rule 2125. Thus, it can only
    be performed using the methods that the Rules explicitly specify.
    Rule 2557 does not explicitly specify a method by which a fine can
    be levied. The assets rules do not provide a general method of
    creating currencies, and Rule 2557 does not provide any method by
    which the fine can be levied. Thus, under Rule 2125, there is no way
    that levying a fine pursuant to the CHoJ can be performed, so R.
    Lee's attempt failed. omd was never fined a Blot, so e has none.
    This CFJ should be judged FALSE.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judge Falsifian's Arguments:

In the below judgement, I accept the caller's arguments on CFJ 3755,
and add additional detail verifying that omd's blot balance is zero
given that R. Lee did not successfully impose the Cold Hand of Justice.

CFJ 3755 was called by Jason Cobb on July 12 with the statement "omd has
1 Blot.". The caller's evidence and arguments are quoted above.


Timeline (all times UTC)
========================

2019-05-20 01:25

 D. Margaux, then the Referee, publishes a report not listing any blots
 owned by omd. The report was ratified seven days later by Rule 2201
 (self-ratification).

2019-07-11 01:45

 H. Referee R. Lee attempts to levy a fine on omd with the following
 message (quoted part removed):

  > This finger pointing is valid, I impose a fine on omd for failing to 
  > judge
  > CFJ 3752 in the allotted time. The crime is tardiness which has a 2-
  > blot
  > base value, but given that the finger was pointed just a day after the
  > time
  > expired and I see no pattern of violations, I impose a fine of 1 blot.

2019-07-12 01:14

  Jason Cobb initiates this CFJ.


Other changes in omd's blot balance since 2019-05-20
====================================================

I don't see any messages purporting to change omd's blot balance since
2019-05-20, other than the one I quoted in the timeline above. All the
referee reports sent between 2019-05-20 and that message that I was able
to find  agree that omd had no blots.

Incidentally, though, I don't think any referee reports published after
the 2019-05-20 one in the timeline above have been ratified.  Here is a
list of reports I compiled that were published since the 2019-05-20
report and at least seven days before this CFJ was called. All times
UTC.

  2019-06-18 12:21: doubted by Jason Cobb 2019-06-23.

  2019-06-14 17:10 (back-dated to 06-12): doubted by D. Margaux in the
  same message.

  2019-06-12 20:19: doubted by Jason Cobb 2019-06-12 20:24 (CFJ 3734)

  2019-06-03 13:57: doubted by D. Margaux in the same message.

  2019-05-27 15:01: doubted by D. Margaux in the same message.

Judgement
=========

I accept the caller's arguments that R. Lee's message did not result in
omd's blot balance changing. Therefore, omd's blot balance is still
zero, as it was in the 2019-05-20 Referee report which has been
ratified.

I judge CFJ 3757 FALSE.

==========================================================================