From: Glenn Overby II (guardcaptain_at_earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Oct 02 2001 - 11:49:50 PDT
Aron Wall writes:
>But my rule *was* evenly-numbered, with a 14. I don't see why that isn't just as
>good (and a more literal) interpretation as the nth fantasy rule. Even if my
>interpretation is rejected, we don't have any good reason to assume that the
>number labels both valid and invalid fantasy rules (although both these latter
>interpretations would invalidate my rule).
>
>I was intending to deliberately exploit this loophole with a future rule (I was not
>intending to attempt to do it with *this* rule).
However, the past precedents of the Committee, at least as far as I've read them
(no, I did not go back and read 100 rounds of archives in the last few minutes!),
support consecutive numbering of rules in the order of posting. I realize that I'm
the one who suggested earlier today that common sense doesn't have a whole lot
to do with FRC, but in this case precedent and common sense (and my ruling) go
hand-in-hand. I stand by the ruling of UNSUCCESSFUL.
Glenn E. Overby II "da judge"
Clinton Twp, MI
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/
==================
"Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature,
and we responded with the best of America...None of us will
ever forget this day, yet we go forward to defend freedom
and all that is good and just in our world."
-- President George W. Bush
11th September 2001
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-02 18:51:25 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST