On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 3:55 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > On 4/25/2020 3:44 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 4/25/20 6:41 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > >> Still, I don't see that there's a way to CFJ on "improper" SHENANIGANS, > >> since such a call is valid if the referee believes that it would be > >> ineffective (whether or not it would be)... I suppose I could call on a > >> hypothetical but tend to prefer not to. > >> > >> -G. > >> > >> > > > > AFAIK there's no prohibition on levying a fine after previously finding > > SHENANIGANS, so couldn't you CFJ on "The Referee CAN levy a fine ..."? > > > > R2478 says that the investigator CAN "conclude" the investigation by > calling shenanigans. I'd argue that the common definition of "conclude" > (supported by an ethical/good of the game desire to avoid double jeopardy) > means you can't conclude the same thing twice. > > I think it's clear that if someone else points their finger, starting a different investigation, that would be separately resolvable? I can't open the rules at the moment, so it's possible that there's an obvious bar I'm missing. -Aris
