CFI: SuperusSophia - Who the judge is.

[SuperusSophia]

Since the issue of who is judge obvioulsy cannot be determined by the rules alone, I believe it falls under a need to interpret the rules.  Charr Rye invoked judgement, making all turns frozen.  AT THE MOMENT, it is Charr Rye's turn, frozen in the first move.  Therefore I am calling judgement on who the judge for Rye's judgement, which would be Count Rez.  So Count Rez, are you the judge or is Quin the judge?

And everyone else, hurry up and vote.  Since the rules do not say that I can't, the players have 24 hrs to vote on Rez's decision starting immediately after he posts his judgement here.  If at that time not everyone has voted, then the 25 points lost or not losts will be based on on half of the players who voted.

Hopefully this will settle the issue and allow the game to continue.

[tinuviel]

I still say it's Leus, for the reason posted in the huge thread o' voting and debate.

*Edit: And because I'm a nice person, here it is:

No, we're debating whose turn it is because if Char Coal was the one to request judgement on his turn, then I am in fact the judge. And since Judge's can't make retroactive decisions, if it is Char Coal's turn and Leus' Butt Man Quintopia is the judge (which he is not), then he can't pass judgement affecting anything that happened on my turn. Personally, I believe that I am the Judge and it is Char Coal's turn - my turn having completed; Quintopia, Leus' Butt Man, believes that he is the judge and it is still my turn.

Right, I see what you're saying and I agreed...until I read back through your amendment more closely, and found that nowhere does it say that "the point scores are taken from the beginning of the circuit of turns." So I maintain that Leus is the rightful Judge here. (Which is probably a good thing anyway, as he hasn't played a part in this disagreement)

[SuperusSophia]

The judge is determined by whoever has the most points at the time judgement is invoked, therefore the judge is Rez for this judgement.  the only real issue I can see is if Rye actually invoked judgement after Rez's proposal passed, but before the points were tallied.  In that case, the judgement would fall to Leus, not Quin anyway.  However, since I feel judgement is required for the judge to be determined, it now falls to Rez, since the time is long, long past due for Rez's points to be tallied.

[Rezantis]

You're actually right, Tinuviel; I posted the wrong version of my rule.  Teh sigh. :)  I don't think Leus would be the judge though 'cause he would've been docked points for not voting.  Teehee.

Sorry, all, easter was kinda busy (and pishoque went down for a while, woooo dns).

Anyway, if it's Rye's turn, either I am the judge or someone else is the judge depending on if my rule passed or not.  If it's my turn, Quint is only the judge if the voting period hasn't finished; otherwise the proposal has already taken effect and whoever has the highest score is the judge.   PAIN.

--

There are, as I see it, two ways out of this snarl.

(A) We accept that we are in such a snarl that there is no clear and defined, and no wholly legal path out of it.  In such a case the first person unable to finish their turn would be the winner.

Ironically, this would mean that I am arguing that Rye is the winner and Rye is arguing that I would be the winner.  We're not even sure who the winner would be - perhaps I and Rye would be declared co-winners - besides, the game's kinda interesting and it'd suck for it to end this early.  Thusly I wholly recommend that we, as a group disregard solution A and work on solution B.  

(B) We, as a group, agree to work together to find a way out of this mess.  

As has already been suggested, we should elect and appoint someone who shall be given unilateral powers to determine the status of the game, and state what has passed (even retroactively).  This appointment should be only temporary and they will immediately lose their powers upon the restart of play.  No penalties will be placed upon people except as would already have occurred under the rules (for instance, for failing to vote - yes, Quint, this means you. ;).

This person will furthermore have the responsibility of calculating and posting everyone's scores up to the point that play restarts.

Before we attempt to elect a judge, we need unanimous consent that this -is- the right course to follow.  If you disagree, please suggest another course for everyone's consideration.

I believe that this is the right and correct course for the game and hereby give my consent.

Furthermore, I hereby pledge that if I am elected as the adjudicator for this matter, I will -not- sustain rule 212.  It is broken, and in it's current state will cause more problems than it solves.  It will, however, likely be seen in a revised state in later turns for subsequent voting.  I will simply act retroactively so as to solve the dispute.

[tinuviel]

You're actually right, Tinuviel; I posted the wrong version of my rule.  Teh sigh. :)  I don't think Leus would be the judge though 'cause he would've been docked points for not voting.  Teehee.

Oops.  :P  
But doesn't not voting simply mean you forfeit your vote?  I don't remember reading anything about a point penalty.

Sorry, all, easter was kinda busy (and pishoque went down for a while, woooo dns).[/qupte]
Yeah, just a tad busy...:D

There are, as I see it, two ways out of this snarl.

(A) We accept that we are in such a snarl that there is no clear and defined, and no wholly legal path out of it.  In such a case the first person unable to finish their turn would be the winner.

(B) We, as a group, agree to work together to find a way out of this mess.  

As has already been suggested, we should elect and appoint someone who shall be given unilateral powers to determine the status of the game, and state what has passed (even retroactively).  This appointment should be only temporary and they will immediately lose their powers upon the restart of play.  No penalties will be placed upon people except as would already have occurred under the rules (for instance, for failing to vote - yes, Quint, this means you. ;).

This person will furthermore have the responsibility of calculating and posting everyone's scores up to the point that play restarts.

Yeah I don't like option A.  The game's only just gotten interesting!  So I think we should definitely work on B.  It makes the most sense to me to elect a Judge from the players who were not directly involved in this, i.e. not you or Quin, at the least. There's a better chance of being unbiased, then.

[Rezantis]

I don't honestly remember if there's a penalty or not and I should relaly go check the rules before posting early morning.  that said I don't have time. :D

It makes the most sense to me to elect a Judge from the players who were not directly involved in this, i.e. not you or Quin, at the least. There's a better chance of being unbiased, then.

Worth a try.  :)  

That knocks out Rye and Sax, too.  Personally I'd nominate either you or Itarien for it.

EDIT:  You because you're trying to be neutral but you -do- have an opinion, Itarien 'cause I think he's also both paying attention and close to unbiased.  Well, if everyone agrees it's a good idea . . .

[CasualSax]

Is Soph biased?

[quintopia]

I think me and Rezantis have agreed to let me pass a judgement.  Do you agree Rez, to abdicate to the judgeship?

[Rye Coal]

I also could vote for Itarien or Tinuviel. I'm definatly about finding a solution - I put too much into this game to tie with Rizantis  ;). I'd rather be soundly defeated before I try for stalemate.  Just out of curiosity, what happened to Darthrevin?  I had pretty much forgotten about 'em until I looked over the cannidates.

[Rezantis]

Not entirely, Quint.  The way I'd prefer to do it is to not have a judge at all, actually.

See, I don't think we need one; with a snarl like this my personal feeling is that if all players are agreeable we could just rewind my turn to before I've posted the final version of my proposal.  That way we have no timing issues and we don't need to worry about untangling the mess - nor are we giving any one person power beyond what the majority has agreed to do to rectify the situation.  It seems the simplest way, to me.  No judgements, we just wipe the slate clean and pretend it didn't happen, except for the lessons we all take away. :)

[Itarien]

I think rewinding might be a good idea, although I think that we don't need to go all the way back to resubmitting a final draft of the proposal. A simple re-vote on the final draft that already been posted would be enough. Going all the way back to resubmission gives Rez the opportunity to post a completely different proposal.

[Rezantis]

It does, but it also causes confusion with timing - why not start from the beginning again and not waste the time on something that's not going to be constructive?  And even if I submit a completely different proposal, everyone gets to vote on it anyway.

Like I said, you just want to penalise me.  If you -really- want to penalise me, just veto whatever I propose, I guess.  :p

[quintopia]

I'm fine with that, then.  However, I think a new thread should be made for that, to make sure everyone agrees.

[tinuviel]

You're actually right, Tinuviel; I posted the wrong version of my rule.  Teh sigh. :)  

Going all the way back to resubmission gives Rez the opportunity to post a completely different proposal.

Yes, I think he'll be wanting to submit the correct version of his rule.  :P  However, that is irrelevant, as if you don't like the changes, you can veto it.  

So yeah.  Good idea, Rez.  :)

[Rezantis]

So yeah.  Good idea, Rez.  :)

Wasn't exactly my idea. :p