The statement in CFJ 1610 is "G. owns a Black Ribbon.". I judge that e does not, this CFJ is FALSE
A proposal passed named "Plain Old Bribery" (7979) which had the text "Every Player who cast a valid not-withdrawn unconditional ballot FOR this proposal earns a Black Ribbon.". Those players included G. E then awarded emself a black ribbon. Within the Ribbon rule (2438), "earn" does not have the ordinary meaning of "gain" but instead means "qualifies for". When a player qualifies for a ribbon, rule 2438 states that "While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon, any player can generally award em that type of Ribbon.". What's the problem? Apparently it is rule 2125's (Regulated Actions) most recent amendment. That rule now states (in relevant part) that "A Restricted Action CAN only be performed as described by the Rules, and only using the methods explicitly specified in the Rules for performing the given action.". The context of the rule's adoption was that the rules incorrectly omitted "by announcement" from some by announcement actions, which worried some 6. The argument is that the new text in rule 2125 bans any action that does not have a method specified by the rules. That argument is correct. An action can now be performed only if a method is explicitly specified, such as "by announcement". The plain text of the new text in 2125 leads to the same result as the amendment's intent. This CFJ means that no ribbons have been successfully awarded since the proposal changing the text of rule 2125 (unless self-ratification has made some of those ribbons awarded). Once again, this CFJ is FALSE. -- >From V.J. Rada
