On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Ed Murphy wrote: >> Quazie wrote: >> >>> If a contract included a provision that a member may lie in relation >>> to the contract without penalty, would a lie in relation to that >>> contract violate R 2149? >> >> Strong game custom holds that rules take precedence over non-rules. > > Equally strong custom holds that this is not true for matters irrelevant to > the Rules. Intermediate items (items wholly governed by contracts, which > are themselves governed by the rules: there lies gray area).
Lying to the PF is relevant to the rules no matter what the subject of the lie is. If I publicly state that France is on the moon, I'm culpable for that. > Test: Will we need to prosecute every Werewolf for lying? Only if the contest devolves into public claims of innocence, at which point it would no longer be an interesting contest. -root
