Re: 185:4 (renumbered from 185:3): UNSUCCESSFUL, -1.0

From: Richard S. Holmes (rsholmes_at_MailBox.Syr.Edu)
Date: Thu May 30 2002 - 08:55:27 PDT

"Jonathan Van Matre" <> 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

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