On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:02 PM D. Margaux <dmargaux...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 7, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Aris Merchant < > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion? > > > > -Aris > > I like it in general. > > Under Rule 2201, the publisher of an optional self-ratifying claim (like > this one) SHOULD resolve any claims of error, and that doesn’t seem like a > good idea here. > > Perhaps the Rule could say that, notwithstanding Rule 2201, the Herald > SHALL resolve any claim of error with respect to a claim of victory, and > the player claiming victory CANNOT do so (unless e is the Herald). > > I thought of that, but it seems a weird exception to add. There wouldn’t really be any point in rejecting an obviously true CoE, since someone could just CFJ. The one thing is that there should probably be a conspicuously and without obfuscation requirement on CoE rejections. -Aris
