Kerim Aydin wrote: > It is conceivable (though unlikely), that >if the Promotor changed hands at the last minute, than the punishment >could be applied to the new officeholder.
This would not be legal. R1504 is clear that the defendant is a specific person. While "the Promotor" may be an unambiguous way to refer to a particular person at a particular time (and in this case it obviously is), it wouldn't magically retarget references to that person in gamestate such as a CFJ. If there were doubt over the holder of the office of Promotor then that would be grounds for rejecting "the Promotor" as a way to identify a defendant. In this case it's clear that the defendant is Zefram, and the CotC published notification of the case with the defendant identified by name. >In balance, it better serves the game to require rigid specifications >of individuals, I think it would take a rule amendment to do this. -zefram
