Judge's arguments for CFJ 3577: Per the caller's arguments, there was indeed a typo in proposal 7912. However obvious it was, the proposal was quite clear that "Campaign Proposals, with power 3" is the name of the enacted rule. This is so clear because the parentheses around that name, coming after the word "entitled", mark the phrase as being a title. Per Rule 105 (1), the power of the rule defaults to 1.0, so this CFJ is TRUE. --- Judge's arguments for CFJ 3578:
CFJ 3577 determined that the rule for campaign proposals only has power 1.0. Rule 2154, at power 2.0, states that a player SHALL under circumstances do something inadvertently proscribed by the campaign proposals rule. Because it has been determined by precedent that a SHALL at a higher power countermands a SHALL NOT at a lower power, Rule 2154 controls, and the ADoP not only SHALL distribute campaign proposals, but MAY do so. FALSE. --- -Aris
