I think this was deliberate.
On 12/4/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Proto-Proposal: Fix revocation of judicial salary
> (AI = 2, please)
>
> Amend Rule 2126 (Voting Power) by replacing this text:
>
> (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause
> loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an
> appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned
> to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC.
>
> with this text:
>
> (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause
> loses one Blue VC. When a judgement other than AFFIRM is
> assigned to the question on disposition in an appeal case,
> the prior judge loses one Blue VC, unless the prior
> question is on sentencing.
>
> and by replacing this text:
>
> (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the
> first time the defendant loses one black VC.
>
> with this text:
>
> (-K) When a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the
> question on disposition in an appeal case, and either the
> prior question is on sentencing or the prior judgement is
> GUILTY, the prior judge loses one Black VC. When a
> sentence in a criminal case becomes active for the first
> time, the defendant loses one black VC.
>
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
