I'm recused now, the judgement doesn't count. I refused because I'm on mobile and don't really want to deal with the linked deputization issue. I recommend both cfjs be assigned to the same person. I arbitrarily recommend quazie.
The point PSS raised doesn't matter though. In a car auction, the auctioneers have to give you the car. The auction still leads to the sale. In CB'S auction, there can be no sale or expectation of a sale. I would really like the next judgement to track this 9ne, if a little more lucidly. On Thursday, July 6, 2017, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote: > I mean I support the moot. Sorry. > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cuddleb...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> I move reconsideration too. >> >> I also point my nose at VJ Rada and wiggle it for the crime of breaking >> his pledgerino. >> >> So many crimes going on lol - y'all goddamn criminals, the lot of you. >> >> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 9:53 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','vijar...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >> >>> I move reconsideration. >>> >>> I recuse myself. >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, July 6, 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < >>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com');>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> TTttPF >>>> ---- >>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > On Jul 5, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < >>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I move to enter this judgement into moot. >>>> > ---- >>>> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >>>> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> On Jul 5, 2017, at 4:35 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> This contains my motion to reconsider and my >>>> >> adressing your argument (although cursorily) >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 6:42 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> I move to reconsider (you can't, you cndan intend to move >>>> >> and wait for two support. >>>> >> >>>> >> I'm judging this FALSE. GASP! Surprise rocks the nation. >>>> >> I'm not judging it FALSE because auctioning is a regulated >>>> >> action though. It seems to me that despite the auction >>>> >> provisions, people could auction their own property >>>> >> without breaching the rules. I'm judging it based on the fact >>>> >> that Estate ownership is regulated, and CB's attempt to auction >>>> >> off Estates owned by another entity (Agora) and person (Josh) >>>> >> does not work. >>>> >> >>>> >> "A player who owns an Estate can and may transfer it to any >>>> >> player, to any Organization, or to Agora, by announcement" >>>> >> from rule 2489 regulates Estate ownership, as does the auction >>>> >> provision. This, mixed with the fact that the ordinary meaning of >>>> >> the word "Owner" means someone who can control their >>>> >> property, precludes anyone from taking an Estate from its owner >>>> >> or causing it to be taken from em, unless specifically authorized >>>> >> by rule (such as the auction provision). >>>> >> >>>> >> CB raises the additional argument that an auction still can be >>>> >> called even if the winner cannot have the property transferred >>>> >> to them. Auction is undefined. The ordinary meaning is >>>> >> "a public sale in which goods or property are sold to the highest >>>> >> bidder.". A sale cannot exist unless the property is actually >>>> >> given to the winner of the auction. I have already explained that >>>> >> this cannot happen. Therefore, an auction has not been called >>>> >> here. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> I motion to reconsider. >>>> >> >>>> >> Whether the winning bid can actually make a transfer or not >>>> shouldn't affect if there is actually an *auction* or not in the first >>>> place, I believe. >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:14 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> I'm judging this FALSE. GASP! Surprise rocks the nation. >>>> >> I'm not judging it FALSE because auctioning is a regulated >>>> >> action though. It seems to me that despite the auction >>>> >> provisions, people could auction their own property >>>> >> without breaching the rules. I'm judging it based on the fact >>>> >> that Estate ownership is regulated, and CB's attempt to auction >>>> >> off Estates owned by another entity (Agora) and person (Josh) >>>> >> does not work. >>>> >> >>>> >> "A player who owns an Estate can and may transfer it to any >>>> >> player, to any Organization, or to Agora, by announcement" >>>> >> from rule 2489 regulates Estate ownership, as does the auction >>>> >> provision. This, mixed with the fact that the ordinary meaning of >>>> >> the word "Owner" means someone who can control their >>>> >> property, precludes anyone from taking an Estate from its owner >>>> >> or causing it to be taken from em, unless specifically authorized >>>> >> by rule (such as the auction provision). >>>> >> >>>> >> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Alex Smith < >>>> ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: >>>> >> On Sun, 2017-07-02 at 02:21 +0200, CuddleBeam wrote: >>>> >>> The moment is ripe to attempt something like this, because it's >>>> Auction >>>> >>> time. Let's go: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Putting Estates up to Auction is an unregulated action, much like >>>> >>> withdrawing. (I don't personally believe this - because I believe >>>> all >>>> >>> actions in the universe are Regulated - but many others do, so I'm >>>> going >>>> >>> off that). In case its of doubt, the following states an obligation >>>> for the >>>> >>> Surveyor to perform, so its not a description of "circumstances >>>> under which >>>> >>> the action would succeed or fail": >>>> >>> >>>> >>> "At the start of each month, if Agora owns at least one Estate, the >>>> >>> Surveyor shall put one Estate which is owned by Agora up for >>>> auction, by >>>> >>> announcement. Each auction ends seven days after it begins." >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Additionally, the state of being in an auction or not is tracked by >>>> nobody, >>>> >>> so it doesn't infringe "would, as part of its effect, modify >>>> information >>>> >>> for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor" >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Therefore: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> - I put every Estate up for Auction, (even those owned by other >>>> players, if >>>> >>> possible). >>>> >>> - I then bid a million shinies on each of them. >>>> >>> - I then bid one shiny on each of them. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I have absolutely no defense towards other people bidding more than >>>> a >>>> >>> million and using my own "scam" to win auctions, which only works >>>> versus >>>> >>> the "conventional" way of winning them by bidding amounts of cash >>>> you >>>> >>> actually own. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I CFJ: "There is currently more than one auction for Estates" >>>> >>> >>>> >>> That's all. >>>> >> >>>> >> This is CFJ 3537. I assign it to V.J. Rada. >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> ais523 >>>> >> Arbitor >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >> >
