Yally wrote: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 20:15, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Ed Murphy wrote: >>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2900 >>> >>> =================== CFJ 2900 (Interest Index = 0) ==================== >>> >>> The Registrar's most recent report should have included that >>> Tiger became Inactive on 2 May, 2010, as the Registrar is >>> required to include in eir report "when each Inactive player >>> became Inactive." >>> >>> ======================================================================== >> >> I set this case's II to 1. >> >> Judgement: FALSE. As per Wooble's gratuitous arguments, with the >> added note that when a player becomes Active, the Registrar is not >> (ceases to be) required to track the previous inactivity dates; so >> following the caller's reading would require information untracked >> for months/years to suddenly become tracked; that's an unreasonable >> reading. >> >> I award myself a capacitor. >> >> -G. > > Interesting. However, the Registrar is required to include the dates > of registration/deregistration of all former players. However, if a > player deregisters and later registers, the Registrar is no longer > required to track eir old dates of registration/deregistration, but > would later be so required if the player deregisters again.
This precedent implies that the Registrar is currently not required to track that e.g. Quazie was registered from 2005-2007 and 2008-2009, only that e was registered from 2009-2010.
