I don't see how that statement is clearly TRUE. From R1789:
The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and
the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that,
henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of
FAGE.
Referencing you has a player here doesn't work, since you weren't a
player at that point. The only other part of R1789 pertaining to the
Registrar's report would be this:
The Registrar shall note the method of
deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports.
Which also doesn't work, for the same reason.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:04 AM, omd <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
> <jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In any case, omd did publish a Cantus Cygneys, but his deregistration
>> wasn't a Writ of FAGE but rather his own doing. I thus judge CFJ 2955
>> FALSE.
>
> But the rules clearly say that the statement is TRUE, whether or not I
> actually deregistered in a Writ of FAGE.
>
