On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 16:20 -0500, comex wrote:
Of course you might complain that I don't annotate the Ruleset with
CFJs. Which is fair-- if someone has the spare time to, let them hold
the office...
R2166: CFJ 1911: This rule does not allow the creation of persons by
announcement.
R2215: CFJ 1921: A statement made to a PF stating that someone agrees to
a contract is agreement to the contract due to this rule, even if not
phrased as an action.
R2166: CFJ 1922: If more than one type of asset has the same name,
attempts to transfer them fail unless they specify which is meant.
R1504: CFJ 1924: Tariffs can be dependent on other factors, instead of
being merely fixed uncomputable durations.
R2198: CFJ 1926: Players cannot generally leave pledges by announcement.
R754: CFJ 1930: Definitions in the rules provide default definitions for
contracts, unless the contract specifically states a different
definition is wanted.
R1504: CFJ 1935a: If someone alleges that an illegal action happened
over 200 days ago, a resulting criminal case must therefore be found
OVERLOOKED, even if the illegal action actually happened more recently.
R2158: CFJ 1938: Just because a judgement is an obvious scam does not
mean it is necessarily inappropriate.
R1742: CFJ 1941: A contract can allow arbitrary persons to act on behalf
of its parties.
R1742: CFJ 1946: It is impossible to agree to a contract that says you
can't agree to it, as such an agreement is self-contradictory.
R101: CFJ 1952: A criminal CFJ is not itself a punishment for the
purposes of this rule.
R2157: CFJ 1953: Causing an appeals panel to do something illegal is not
a violation of the rule the appeals panel broke, but of rule 2157.
R2166: CFJ 1956: It is possible for two fungible assets of the same type
to own different amounts of another type of asset.
R2198: CFJ 1958: Specifying a means for the termination of a contract
does not imply that that means is POSSIBLE.
R683: CFJ 1959: The validity of votes is evaluated instantaneously,
rather than at the time the votes are cast.
R2143: CFJ 1971: A disclaimer saying that information in a report is not
necessarily true prevents the report being a report.
R2166: CFJ 1978: The asset holdings in a report self-ratify even if
there is a claim of error against a different part of that report.
R2191: CFJ 1980: If a contract's internal state is uncertain, and this
affects the contract's statement as to whether it is a pledge, this
causes it to be uncertain whether the contract is a pledge.
R101: CFJ 1981: A punishment must be handed down by the rules to qualify
as a punishment under this rule and thus prevent future punishments.
R591: CFJ 1983: Inquiry cases generally exist even if the statement
given is not gramatically a statement.
R1868: CFJ 1990: It is POSSIBLE (although illegal) for the CotC to
assign a poorly qualified entity to a CFJ.
R478: CFJ 1994: A message happens at the time it is sent (by leaving the
sender's technical domain of control), even if it does not arrive until
later.
R2193: CFJ 2002: This rule is the Monster, due to its name.
R2215: CFJ 2004: A rhetorical statement does not have a truth value, and
so does not mislead people as to its truth.
R1504: CFJ 2007: This rule makes it impossible to put players into the
chokey by announcement.
R2141: CFJ 2013: Rules can allow, disallow and/or mandate physically
impossible actions, but this does not mean that a rule can cause such an
action to happen.
R754: CFJ 2014: Referring to I when acting on behalf of someone else
is ambiguous.
R1742: CFJ 2017: It is impossible to make a player into a contract by
agreeing to em.
R478: CFJ 2021: public in public message and public forum has a
different meaning; a public message which is a forum is not necessarily
a public forum.
R101: CFJ 2032: This rule prevents contests which bribe their parties to
fail to excercise their rights under this rule from working.
R1922: CFJ 2035: Judging that someone may be awarded the title of
Scamster does not mean that the judge CAN award that title.
R2145: CFJ 2042: Judgements in equity cases can affect the parties to
partnerships bound by the judgement, even if the parties of the
partnerships have changed since or the partnerships have been dissolved.
R101: CFJ 2052: There is a strong presumption that excercising rights
under this rule is not inequitable behaviour.
R2150: CFJ 2055: Persons do not lose to be persons merely by losing
access to email.
R478: CFJ 2056: One message sent via multiple fora is still just one
message.
R2145: CFJ 2057: Partnerships are still persons if at least to persons
SHALL ensure they meet their obligations, even if they CANNOT.
R101: CFJ 2060: This rule does not prevent excess CFJs being refused as
the CFJs could be filed again later.
R754: CFJ 2062: Synonyms created via rot13 or other simple encryption
schemes are synonyms for the purpose of this rule if instructions for
decoding them are given in the same message.
R2178: CFJ 2064: Changes to public contracts
