Re: Rule 185:1: INVALID, +1.7

From: Richard S. Holmes (rsholmes_at_MailBox.Syr.Edu)
Date: Thu May 30 2002 - 07:31:08 PDT


rsholmes_at_mailbox.syr.edu (Richard S. Holmes) writes:

> "Jonathan Van Matre" <JVanMatre_at_oslp.com> writes:
>
> > It has 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.  The Judge
> > will deem such rules VALID if they meet the criteria set out above, and
> > any rule found guilty of defamation 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.

The Judge has belatedly realized that in his concern over whether the
second half of the second sentence of the last paragraph is or is not
consistent with the ROs, he has overlooked a problem with the first
half.  Namely: This rule attempts to redefine the criteria by which a
rule is *initially* declared VALID, and that *is* inconsistent with
RO6.

I therefore change my judgement; 185.1 is INVALID, and loses a style
point for its invalidity.

The Judge, fortunately, is not subject to style points.

--
- Rich Holmes
  Syracuse, NY

--
Rule Date: 2002-05-30 14:31:28 GMT


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST