See also CFJ 1346, although that case didn't preclude the possibility of incorrect judgements affecting things, as game custom has since. Or Lindrum World. Rule 217 actually does give force to "past judgements", but only as one factor in cases of inclarity.
Sent from my iPhone On Jun 28, 2012, at 11:40 AM, com...@gmail.com wrote: > If a judgement is incorrect, it's just incorrect: there's no reason why a > case should end up with an inappropriate judgement, unless a judicial panel > is too hasty with AFFIRM/OVERRULE, but if it does, and it's widely accepted > the judgement was incorrect, it's not the end of the world (the judgement has > no force). > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 28, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Ozymandias Haynes <ozymandias.hay...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Elliott Hird >> <penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> On 28 June 2012 17:07, Ozymandias Haynes <ozymandias.hay...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> I don't think this CFJ alone would constitute a win, but I could >>>> submit a distinct claim of victory and in the case of a TRUE or FALSE >>>> judgment here, cite the CFJ as evidence. No? >>> >>> It is easy to see that this would not work by removing the >>> (inconsequential) self-reference from the picture: CFJ on "I have >>> won.", get it judged TRUE, and claim victory based on that CFJ. That >>> wouldn't make the judgement correct -- there is no rules or >>> custom-based argument for you having won. So the judgement would be >>> appealed. >>> >>> And by the way, welcome to Agora! >> >> Well, the difference between my submitted CFJ and your case of CFJ: "I >> have won." is that in the latter case I would expect a judge to rule >> FALSE and that be the end of it. For either a ruling of TRUE or FALSE >> of my CFJ, the judgment would logically imply that I have won, and >> this would have the authority of a judicial ruling in some sense. >> It's a way of forcing a Judge to assert something they would normally >> not assert. >> >> But in any case, you could always say that a certain controversial >> judgment is wrong. Indeed, I would expect players with strong views >> contrary to any official judgment to have this belief, and divided >> belief on some point is the reason for the CFJ in the first place. >> Isn't judgment supposed to be the legitimizing mechanism by which the >> game settles a controversial matter and moves forward? Or is it your >> view that some judicial decisions are "incorrect" and, if the Agoran >> community lets this "incorrect" ruling stand, then the game bifurcates >> in an illegitimate way? Or have I misconstrued you entirely? >> >> Thanks for the welcome. :D >> >> -Ozymandias
