Kerim Aydin wrote: > Eris wrote: > > > The Deckmastor keeps records on cards and (at time of CFJ) > > > pending draws; therefore, pending draws are regulated. > > Cite the rule that requires this. > > R1677 implies a things called pending draws exist and have regulated > mechanisms for being changed. But Eris is right, the deckmastor > doesn't keep records of pending draws. So to interpret R1677, we > must fall back on a common definition of "pending draws" and the > mapping of draws -> cards in common English is compelling. >
At TOCFJ, R1677/12 did not discuss pending draws; these were mentioned only in Rs 2069/2 and 2074/0. As before, I am using the SLR of 21 March 2006. Pending draws therefore had just as much meaning then as initiative does now -- as a dangling reference. (Initiative is currently noted only in R1664/29, and my effort to get rid of it is currently Stalled.) As Goethe holds, all we have left is the normal meaning of "pending draw." However, I just checked the rules, and we apparantly repealed the rule that said that stuff has its normal English meaning unless the rules say otherwise. > Eris wrote: > > > The question is therefore, to what extent were pending draws > > > regulated at time of CFJ. > > Huh? A thing is either regulated or unregulated. You said it was > > regulated. Where does extent enter into the discussion? > > I think it's clearer to think of "what aspect" of pending draws are > regulated rathern than "what extent". For example, the granting of > draws could be regulated while the satisfying of draws could be > unregulated. I agree with you that this proto-judgement doesn't > clarify what is meant. Good point, Eris. Pending draws were undefined at TOCFJ, and therefore unregulated. However, cards were regulated -- the Deckmastor still had to keep track of who held which cards. On one hand, draws could be fulfilled based on game practice; on the other tentacle, it seems to me that draws could not be fulfilled in a way that modified card holdings. Based on that reasoning, I am now inclined to rule FALSE. This is, of course, what draft decisions are all about. -- Benjamin Schultz, KE3OM OscarMeyr
