Round 9/Rulings: Difference between revisions

Line 242:

;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat | OVERTURNED

: Response: "true". The Duck Disciple, as defined in the rules, is a specific entity and references to the Duck Disciple in the rules cannot be supplanted by a named duck.

;Vote of Confidence to Overturn | Random Internet Cat | 6-1 in favor to overturn

;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat

: Amended response: "false" for the same reasons as above.

== Ruling 24 ==

;2021-03-25 | Wotton

: requesting a judgement on the following:

: (A) A scouting duck still gains/loses quacks through the pond rule, because the benefits are provided to the duck, not the player.

: (B) The scouting rule only pauses direct benefits/costs to the player/the scouting duck itself; Scouting ducks are taken into account when calculating the quack gain/loss of non-scouting ducks in the same pond and thus indirectly provide benefits to the non-scouting ducks in the same pond.

;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat

: Response:

: (A) False. I don't buy this. What's good for the duck is good for the person.

: (B) True. I see no reason to believe that the duck ceases counting as part of the pond when scouting.

== Ruling 25 ==

;2021-03-27 | Wotton

: (A) It's currently legal to feed your own duck with a grape.

: (B) The effect of a fruit does not always take place after the associated feeding action i.e. the effect of a fruit can make the associated feeding action legal, even if that action would be illegal otherwise.

;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat | OVERTURNED

: Responses:

: (A) "false".

Fruit are items that can be fed to a duck as specified in the Feeding Ducks subrule.

</blockquote>

: explicitly limits the applicability of fruits in the fruit table to the following from Feeding Ducks:

Once per voting period, a player may feed another player’s duck by announcing which duck they with to feed in #game-actions, and optionally adding one valid fruit.

</blockquote>

: (B) "false". Fruit can only be fed as part of an otherwise-legal feeding action, as ruled above.

;Vote Of Confidence to Overturn | Nyhilo | 2-1 in favor to overturn

: I would like to initiate a public vote of confidence to overturn this ruling.

: The second column of the Fruits table is not listed merely as the fruits' "effects" or "benefits", it is the fruits' descriptions. As such, the text of the descriptions column hold the same weight as rule text as the initial paragraph of the '''Fruits''' rule.

: If the sentence ''"You may use grapes to feed one of your own ducks instead of another's."'' was included in the initial paragraph, it would undoubtedly be accepted as an exception to the other sentence without question. Because the fruit descriptions are a part of the rule text, I argue that they also have the ability to apply any assertion they wish, including specifying exceptions to rules - other and self.

== Ruling 26 ==

;2021-04-04 | Nyhilo

: I request a ruling from the honorable @Random Internet Cat .

: In the Duck Disciple rule, does <pre>all ducks that dealt damage to that Duck Disciple gain 1d6 quacks.</pre>

: mean we roll 1d6 for each individual duck that dealt damage, or that we roll 1d6 once, and all participating ducks receive that amount?

;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat

: Response: "the latter". It would be the former if it said "each duck" rather than "all ducks".

@@ Line 242: / Line 242: @@
 ;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat | OVERTURNED
 : Response: "true". The Duck Disciple, as defined in the rules, is a specific entity and references to the Duck Disciple in the rules cannot be supplanted by a named duck.
+;Vote of Confidence to Overturn | Random Internet Cat | 6-1 in favor to overturn
 ;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat
 : Amended response: "false" for the same reasons as above.
+== Ruling 24 ==
+;2021-03-25 | Wotton
+: requesting a judgement on the following:
+: (A) A scouting duck still gains/loses quacks through the pond rule, because the benefits are provided to the duck, not the player.
+: (B) The scouting rule only pauses direct benefits/costs to the player/the scouting duck itself; Scouting ducks are taken into account when calculating the quack gain/loss of non-scouting ducks in the same pond and thus indirectly provide benefits to the non-scouting ducks in the same pond.
+;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat
+: Response:
+: (A) False. I don't buy this. What's good for the duck is good for the person.
+: (B) True. I see no reason to believe that the duck ceases counting as part of the pond when scouting.
+== Ruling 25 ==
+;2021-03-27 | Wotton
+: (A) It's currently legal to feed your own duck with a grape.
+: (B) The effect of a fruit does not always take place after the associated feeding action i.e. the effect of a fruit can make the associated feeding action legal, even if that action would be illegal otherwise.
+;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat | OVERTURNED
+: Responses:
+: (A) "false".
+ <blockquote>
+ Fruit are items that can be fed to a duck as specified in the Feeding Ducks subrule.
+ </blockquote>
+: explicitly limits the applicability of fruits in the fruit table to the following from Feeding Ducks:
+ <blockquote>
+ Once per voting period, a player may feed another player’s duck by announcing which duck they with to feed in #game-actions, and optionally adding one valid fruit.
+ </blockquote>
+: (B) "false". Fruit can only be fed as part of an otherwise-legal feeding action, as ruled above.
+;Vote Of Confidence to Overturn | Nyhilo | 2-1 in favor to overturn
+: I would like to initiate a public vote of confidence to overturn this ruling.
+: The second column of the Fruits table is not listed merely as the fruits' "effects" or "benefits", it is the fruits' descriptions. As such, the text of the descriptions column hold the same weight as rule text as the initial paragraph of the '''Fruits''' rule.
+: If the sentence ''"You may use grapes to feed one of your own ducks instead of another's."'' was included in the initial paragraph, it would undoubtedly be accepted as an exception to the other sentence without question. Because the fruit descriptions are a part of the rule text, I argue that they also have the ability to apply any assertion they wish, including specifying exceptions to rules - other and self.
+== Ruling 26 ==
+;2021-04-04 | Nyhilo
+: I request a ruling from the honorable @Random Internet Cat .
+: In the Duck Disciple rule, does <pre>all ducks that dealt damage to that Duck Disciple gain 1d6 quacks.</pre>
+: mean we roll 1d6 for each individual duck that dealt damage, or that we roll 1d6 once, and all participating ducks receive that amount?
+;Ruling | Judge Random Internet Cat
+: Response: "the latter". It would be the former if it said "each duck" rather than "all ducks".