Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>Rule 478: "Any action performed by sending a message is performed at
>the time date-stamped on that message."
I'd point at the preceding sentence:
Where the rules define an action that CAN be performed "by
announcement", a player performs that action by announcing that
e performs it.
BobTHJ announced that e would perform it at a specific future time,
whereas I interpret the rule as requiring the announcement to be that e
is presently performing it. We don't have any rule granting effect to
an announcement of future action.
>Forging your date stamp arguably would allow you to perform actions in
>the future, although I wouldn't advocate it.
There are several date stamps on each message. Although we most commonly
talk about dates of events based on the Date: header, this is strictly
incorrect (CFJ 831) and the appropriate date stamp is actually one of the
Received: headers in transit (CFJ 1646), one over which the message's
author does not exert control. There have been a very few cases where
a message was in transit around a deadline, requiring us to look at the
Received: headers. We've also always ignored a Date: header that is
manifestly wrong. Usually, though, the Date: value is close enough to
give the right results.
When I was registrar, many years ago, I actually used the appropriate
Received: header routinely. As far as I know this is unique among
officeholders.
-zefram
