On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> CFJ 3425
> is hereby assigned to G.
>
> CALLER
> Murphy
>
> STATEMENT
> If the rules state that a person CAN perform an action, but do not
> explicitly state how, then e CAN perform it by announcement.
>
> CALLER'S ARGUMENTS
> This has come up before, but I don't know offhand how drastically the
> relevant rules have changed since the last time.
Proto-judgement:
[This is without regard to past precedent]
Rule 2152/7 (Mother, May I?) reads in part:
5. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful.
Therefore, any "attempt" to perform a CAN, where the CAN is not qualified
by a method, will succeed if we can say that a legal "attempt" took place.
For an attempt to change a regulated quantity, the attempt must communicate
with the recordkeepor, and we generally require clear communication. A
message to a discussion forum would not qualify, as following a discussion
forum is not required. However, sending a public message would clearly
legally communicate the attempt to all players, and so would be a legal
"attempt" to perform the action.
Note that this is not directly and officially "by announcement" exactly,
as the last paragraph of R478 reserves that for cases where "CAN by
announcement" is actually stated. Instead, the "attempt" is performed by
announcement, which then causes the action to succeed. So, strictly and
technically speaking, the "attempt" is by announcement, and the attempt
causes the action to succeed, but that's not *quite* the same as the
action being performed by announcement.
FALSE on a technicality; the action succeeds, but via the announcement of
attempt and R2152, not "CAN by announcement" as per R478. This technicality
is important, as it ensures that "CAN by method X" isn't severable into
"CAN (by announcement attempt) by method X".
