omd wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Sean Hunt <scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> > wrote: >>>> =================== CFJ 2890 (Interest Index = 0) ==================== >>>> >>>> It is generally POSSIBLE for me to make a proposal >>>> Undistributable for a fee. >>>> >>>> ======================================================================== >>> TRUE. Not being permitted to perform something is different than being >>> forbidden from performing it. The rule thus means "a player CAN do this >>> unless some other rule says he can't". It is, thus, a manner of subtly >>> deferring to any rule, including one of lower power. > > I intend to appeal this with two support. Making a proposal > undistributable modifies information for which some player is required > to be a recordkeepor, so R2125 forbids me from doing it except as > allowed by the rules. > > Evidence: > > e) It would, as part of its effect, modify information for which > some player is required to be a recordkeepor. Such an action > CANNOT modify that information except as allowed by the > rules.
Gratuitous: R2125 and R2283 together can be interpreted as either generally allowing fee-based actions (R2125's "except as allowed by the rules" is triggered by R2283 and R2283's "not otherwise forbidden" is satisfied by R2125) or prohibiting them. Both of these are circularly consistent, thus common sense etc. favors the former over the latter.
