Goethe wrote: > Ok, it may be more broken than that. Recent CFJs have held that a breach > of the rules related to missing a time limit occurs at the moment a time > limit is passed. Once that time limit is passed, if the officer does the > job anyway (late), e still has broken the rule. > > Which means that, once the time limit is passed, the officer is no > longer required to perform the action. E is punishable for eir > past failure to do, but since e breaks no more rules by continued > failure, the rules are not requiring em to do it. > > Which means that R2160(a) and (b) can *never* be true simultaneously. > > Thoughts?
Already judged as non-broken (CFJs 2120-21), unless the relevant rules have changed sufficiently since then (August 2008) that this interpretation no longer holds up.
