On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 18:38, Jason Cobb <jason.e.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > Title: Double Jeopardy Prevention Act
Is this a serious problem? If the current referee really wants to levy a fine for something a previous referee found to be Shenanigans, the accused is still protected by items (2) and (3). Those are likely to involve CFJs, which tend to be sticky as far as I can tell, so the jeopardy ends there. I'm leaning mildly against this as adding unnecessary text, and also making it slightly easier for someone to escape punishment if they control the referee (though only slightly; the ref can already make a fine forgivable). -- - Falsifian
