What would everyone's thoughts be on pragmatizing CFJs? If the arbitor assigns it, the CFJ comes into existence, whether or not it did before. This phrasing would still work, because the case wouldn't come into existence when it was called, but when the arbitor assigned it. It would end the problem of having to either assign conditionally or call a meta-CFJ. Happy to write up an implementation if there's support.
-Aris On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 7:48 PM Edward Murphy <emurph...@zoho.com> wrote: > rol...@pbegames.com wrote: > > > ---- Signed section - include this line ---- > > > > Results: > > Results sent via email. > > Summary: Possibly a CFJ > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Roll One > > Generating 1 rolls of d6, 1 per line. > > Comment: If this dice rolls an odd number, I call for judgement on the > statement "This is a CFJ". > > > > 5 > > If this is a CFJ, then it is CFJ 3639, and I assign it to V.J. Rada. > > > Message sent to these addresses: callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk, > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org > > > > Requesting IP: 213.205.242.23 > > > > ---- Signed section - include this line ---- > > > > Signature: > 2e6d7d986a23a257f2fd9f4540a90d77cea1c6ac640032961f44278d28978fc3 > > To verify: http://www.pbegames.com/verify/ > > > > --- > > Dice rolls by: http://www.pbegames.com/roller/ > > Roller version 1.5 > > Contact: http://www.pbegames.com/contact/ > > Support the site. Shop DriveThruRPG: http://goo.gl/qO7lxw > > > > > > >
