I've found an error in the text of R2089/4 that were published from 2005-04-25 to 2005-08-06. R2089/4 was derived from R2089/1 by a series of three amendments by proposals in the same batch (P4715, P4726, and P4728), so R2089/2 and R2089/3 were never published. The published R2089/4 reflects the amendments from P4726 and P4728, but not the amendment of P4715. The proposal in question, as published with the voting results, is:
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 4715 by Goethe, AI=1, Ordinary, Disinterested browsing shelf Amend Rule 2089 (Gardner Library) by replacing the text: A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep. with: A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep, provided that card has been in the Library's possession for 24 hours or more. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The "provided that ..." clause was theoretically part of R2089/4, but the ruleset publications never reflected that. The problem ends on 2005-08-06, when P4834 did a full text replacement on R2089. Could those who were playing at the time comment on the consequences of the error? Goethe? You'll be pleased to hear that as far as I can tell this is the only error of its kind since 2001-05. -zefram
