On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 15 May 2011, Ed Murphy wrote: >> Bucky wrote: >> > Gratuitous Arguments: >> > The precedent from CfJ 2884 that non-registered people may register by >> > announcement (in addition to the normal method) is relevant to this case. >> > Given the contents of Rule 2288 (Induction), it is clear that the >> > precedent extends to registering by Agoran Consent. >> >> The question is not whether the Induction rule works in general, but >> how R1728(b)(3) (i.e. one person announcing intent and a different >> person performing the action) applies. It's most often used with >> actions like "appealing a case" or "making a player inactive", where >> it's usually not so important /who/ performs the action, just that it >> gets performed. How it interacts with actions where the identity of >> the actor is clearly significant-- there may be precedent, but I don't >> remember it offhand, and I'm pretty sure there isn't any precedent for >> registration in particular (which has different standards than typical >> actions performed by announcement). > > It's also very relevant that e published a clear and unambiguous intent to > register.
Ah, but R869 only lets me become a player if I intend to become a player at that time. Not only did my announcement include a waiting period, but it was also made at a time when it was IMPOSSIBLE for me to be registered.
