I change all sitting players to standing.
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2770
=================== CFJ 2770 (Interest Index = 1) ====================
Murphy satisfies the Winning Condition of Renaissance.
========================================================================
Caller: Murphy
Judge: Yally
Judgement: TRUE
Appeal: 2770a
Decision: REMAND
Judge: comex
Judgement:
========================================================================
History:
Called by Murphy: 27 Feb 2010 16:02:08 GMT
Assigned to Yally: 27 Feb 2010 17:09:11 GMT
Judged TRUE by Yally: 07 Mar 2010 17:12:19 GMT
Appealed by comex: 07 Mar 2010 17:22:14 GMT
Appealed by Murphy: 07 Mar 2010 18:25:28 GMT
Appealed by coppro: 07 Mar 2010 18:39:38 GMT
Appeal 2770a: 07 Mar 2010 18:39:38 GMT
REMANDED on Appeal: 11 Mar 2010 22:22:36 GMT
Remanded to Yally: 11 Mar 2010 22:22:36 GMT
Yally recused: 08 Apr 2010 13:23:25 GMT
Assigned to coppro: 08 Apr 2010 13:25:45 GMT
coppro recused: 08 Apr 2010 22:55:29 GMT
Assigned to comex: (as of this message)
========================================================================
Caller's Arguments:
I won by Renaissance last November, but no rule explicitly stated that
I ceased to satisfy the Winning Condition of Renaissance (contrast the
cleanup procedures for Paradox, Clout, and Legislation). For Winning
Conditions (generally defined as "when X occurs", while Losing
Conditions are generally defined as "while X is true"), I can think of
three possible interpretations:
1) Winning Conditions are only satisfied for an instant. If you
satisfy any Losing Conditions during that same instant, tough
cookies, you have to get rid of them and then re-satisfy a
Winning Condition.
2) Winning Conditions are satisfied until you win with them, at
which point they're implicitly turned off (and the cleanup
procedure should, if needed, prevent them from being turned on
again for the same reason as before).
3) Winning Conditions are satisfied until explicitly turned off.
Of these, #1 is messy (if you destroy Ribbons to satisfy Renaissance,
then later in the same message destroy Rests to cease satisfying
having-Rests, does it work?); both #2 and #3 are more plausible, but I
favor #3 because the cleanup procedures intuitively suggest as much.
========================================================================
Judge Yally's Arguments:
Rule 2186:
When one or more persons satisfy at least
one Winning Condition and do not satisfy any Losing Conditions,
all such persons win the game.
...
Each Winning Condition should (if needed) specify a cleanup
procedure to prevent an arbitrary number of wins arising from
essentially the same conditions. When one or more persons win
the game, for each Winning Condition satisfied by at least one
of those persons, its cleanup procedure occurs.
Rule 2199:
If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for
Ribbons, then a player CAN destroy one Ribbon of each such color
in eir possession to satisfy the Winning Condition of
Renaissance.
The issue with this case comes with the word "satisfy." dictionary.com
defines the word satisfy as "to fulfill the desires, expectations,
needs, or demands of." This implies that once these needs are
satisfied, they continue to be satisfied until some outside effect
makes them no longer satisfied. And this would seem appropriate.
Consider satisfying the conditions for a mathematical proof. When
Andrew Wiles satisfied the conditions for a proof of Fermat's Last
Theorem, it was not for an instant that the idea was proven and then
once again it was unknown if A^n + B^n = C^n for a given integer n >=
2. Instead, the conditions for the theorem were continually satisfied.
Too, by destroying one Ribbon of each color in eir posession, Murphy
satisfied the Winning Condition of Renaissance perpetually until some
outside even caused him to no longer satisfy the Winning Condition of
Renaissance. The second quote from Rule 2186 seems to support this
belief, as it suggest the need for a cleanup procedure to prevent
multiple wins. It would seem the intent of this rule is that the
cleanup procedure stop the perpetual Winning Condition. However, this
Win by Renaissance is appropriately flawed. TRUE.
========================================================================
