On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:59 PM, Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk> wrote: > I think this is a pretty clear UNDECIDABLE. It's paradoxical whether > Einos fulfils the conditions to still be a protectorate (it was once), > and therefore whether it is currently a protectorate. The rules-defined > action in the CFJ subject is possible only if it isn't.
The section of the rule in bold isn't false, so it's not a protectorate. The fact that it's also not true is irrelevant to the game, take it up wit Aristotle.
