On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 05:20 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: > YAFI, YGI. CFJ, disqualifying ais523: ais523 successfully amended > Points Party in the message quoted in evidence. > > Arguments: "with 4 days notice" is close enough to "With Notice" that > it arguably counts as a synonym, in which case it failed because Rule > 1728 (a) requires specifying the method up front. > > Evidence: the above-quoted message. > > I leave the Points Party. (Disclaimer: This fails if the above CFJ > statement is FALSE.)
Arguments: With Notice didn't exist when the Points Party was created. See also the endless precedents about the First Speaker, and the strong implication of rule 1586; that using a rules-undefined term in a way that clearly indicates that it isn't meant to be a term in the rules doesn't cause it to become a use of a rules-defined term if a term that's vaguely similar is later defined in the rules. (Besides, nothing prevents the action taking place /even if/ it's defined to mean "With Notice", simply because although it can't be done dependently, the natural-language definition allows the action to be done independently. This is possibly a bug in the dependent action rules.) -- ais523
