On 5 Jan 2009, at 18:46, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Therefore, taking A-C together, this court finds that ehird DOES have
Rests, that constitute a losing condition and reduce voting power
as indicated by the Rules, without violating R101. However, R101
takes
precedence over the clause of R2229/0 that limits ehird's spending,
thus e is not currently constrained by the "CANNOT spend Notes" clause
of R2229/0 (if ehird goes below 8 rests but not down to zero, then
goes
up above 8 again, this might need to be readdressed depending on the
exact circumstances).
Confusing. I have things that are like rests but don't always behave
like rests...? But that still are rests?
