On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote: > The ambassador is now gone thanks to the anarchist, but there are > still rules that define things as his responsibility. How is this > handled?
One theory is that we have to use a common, dictionary definition of ambassador. Would anyone who is a member of more than one nomic with which we have relations fit that definition? Or if the rules imply that there is only one ambassador, might it be the member of the most such nomics? The precedent for this is in CFJ 1500. -Goethe.
