On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/9/20 ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Quite possibly that would violate R101. >> -- >> ais523 >> > > If it does then so does the 5 CFJ thing
And, as I was persuaded of when I asked about excess CFJs, if that should ever come up then it's a simple matter to override the new rule by precedence, as long as we're careful not to give it power 3. But, as long as we're doing this, we might as well come up with a general system for summary judgements by the CotC (or someone else, maybe even by any first-class player, say with 3 Support). R104 is hardly the only subject for trivial CFJs. Pavitra
