On 2/7/2022 3:34 PM, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > An FLR annotation to rule 1789 references CFJ 1594, whose appeal found > that players could be deregistered in a Writ of FAGE even if there were > no Registrar. > > However, rule 1789 looked a little different at the time – it stated > that a Cantus Cygneus had to be submitted to the CotC, who would > subsequently ask the Registrar to make a note in eir report that the > Writ of FAGE had occurred. At the time of the CFJ, the office of > "Registrar" didn't exist, so the CFJ was basically about determining > whether the requirement on the CotC caused the whole Cantus Cygneus > process to fail or not. > > With the modern version of rule 1789, in which Canti Cygnei are > submitted to the Registrar, the annotation is therefore dangerously > misleading – it makes it look like the CFJ was about whether it is > possible to submit a Cantus Cygneus to a vacant office, rather than > about later steps in the process. I therefore petition the Rulekeepor > to remove this annotation from the FLR, as it is no longer relevant to > this rule (the text of the rule does not match the situation that the > CFJ envisaged), and is susceptible to being misinterpreted. >
Followup: CFJ 2953 (just mentioned in gratuitous arguments) is probably a good replacement that was judged against more modern wording. https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?2953
