From:      owner-frc-digest
To:        frc-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject:   frc-digest V1 #391
Reply-To:  frc
Errors-To: owner-frc-digest
Precedence: bulk


frc-digest               Thursday, 8 February 1996     Volume 01 : Number 391

FOR 50:B 

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

From: Stein.Kulseth@kjeller.fou.telenor.no
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:04:42 +0100
Subject: FOR 50:B 

Thus I vote, and add comments:

RO8 as it stands is not inconsistent, but it is a bit awkward
as the time limit for questioning a rules validity is
3 days after its *posting* not 3 days after its *judgement*
(proper or default). This awkwardness shows most strongly when
judgement is late, especially when the 3-day judgement period times
out. Then proposals to question validity must be made before
the judged validity is known.

I find the new RO8 a great improvement, much clearer and
shorter to boot.

Note, though, that it removes the time limit for proposing
validity changes. At least until I see otherwise, I think this
is a slight improvement too. It allows us too "clean up" the
ruleset if any inconsistensies has gone by unnoticed.
*And* it allows for even more mayhem in highly competitve
rounds like "Win at any cost".


- -- Stein                            stein.kulseth@tf.telenor.no
                G=Stein;S=Kulseth;O=TF;P=telenor;A=telemax;C=no;
                                http://www.nta.no/brukere/stein

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

End of frc-digest V1 #391
*************************