On Wednesday 15 October 2008 07:18:58 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> Goethe wrote:
>>>> Append the following sentence to R2202:
>>>> A player SHALL NOT ratify nor support the ratification
>>>> of a report e knows to be false.
>>>
>>> This criminalizes ratification to patch over errors that no one
>>> is much interested in fixing another way. In such cases, the
>>> defendant /could/ get away with no one bothering to initiate a
>>> criminal case, or with the judge selecting DISCHARGE, but still.
>>
>> I'm not particularly fond of that practice anyway. Usually, an
>> entire report is ratified, which fixes the particular thing we're
>> interested in but could also ratify additional errors.
>
> I had pretty nearly this same discussion inside my head while
> writing it. No strong opinion, so I'll let voters decide. One
> compromise would be that if e knows something to be false, e must
> point it out in the notice of intent. -G.
Something like:
A player SHALL act in good faith to make obvious to
the Players generally any known falsehoods or
inaccuracies in any document the ratification of which
e attempts, supports, or performs, or in any
self-ratifying document e publishes.
Pavitra
