On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Create the following Rule, "Standing for Rights", power 1.8: > > If an inquiry case purports that an interpretation of Agoran > Law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a defined Right, but > the CFJ statement does not refer to a specific instance, that > has actually occurred, in which the interpretation has been > applied in a way that materially affects game play, the case > Lacks Standing and the appropriate judgement is UNDETERMINED.
Isn't IRRELEVANT a better judgement to appropriate-ate? Also, I don't think there should be a comma after "instance". --Ivan Hope CXXVII
