From: Richard S. Holmes (rsholmes_at_MailBox.Syr.Edu)
Date: Thu May 30 2002 - 08:55:27 PDT
"Jonathan Van Matre" <JVanMatre_at_oslp.com> writes: > It has again come to the attention of the FRC Oversight Committee that > recent rounds have contained an inordinate number of errors, ranging > from the merely grammatical to errors in judgement. For example, use of > the non-word "proceedure" and an ill-advised pun on the name of the > current pontiff and an obscure Texas Libertarian politician were both > committed in the previous round. Therefore, all FRC members are > enjoined to take corrective action whenever they discern an error > committed by another member of the FRC. > > However, FRC members are advised to remain cautious of committing > slander, libel, or defamation. Please bear in mind the three criteria > for defamation: > > 1) The statement must be untrue, > 2) The statement must be communicated to a third party, and > 3) The statement must be demonstrably harmful to the reputation of the > victim. > > For the purposes of this round, a player's total accumulated Style > points in the round will be considered a reflection of eir Reputation. > > Players may submit Rules claiming damages for defamation. Any rule > found guilty of defamation (as a result of the rule claiming defamation > being ruled VALID) will have its ruling changed to INVALID as > punishment. At the Judge's discretion, Style/Reputation points may also > be adjusted as a further penalty or compensation for harm from > defamation. JUDGEMENT: Inconsistent with (the other, prior) 185.3, submitted shortly before and presumably unknown to Jonathan, therefore UNSUCCESSFUL. STYLE: Resubmission. -1.0. -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY -- Rule Date: 2002-05-30 15:55:49 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST