3183: FALSE
First off, in context, it was obvious that omd's message intended both
instances of the single character ' to be parsed as the golem's name,
and no rule requires eir message to be parsed otherwise.
Second, the final sentence of Rule 2361 explicitly acknowledges the
ability of Slave Golems to be deregistered, and supplies a mechanism
that prevents its first sentence from being contradicted for any
non-zero length of time.
Criminal case: omd violated Rule 2170 (Power=3) by selecting a
confusing nickname for eir golem previously named Mr. Incredible.
Arguments:
omd's nickname was confusing enough to trigger multiple CFJs (3180
through 3183). As omd points out, selecting a confusing nickname is
not defined as a Crime, but it does violate a rule (R2170, R2152)
and that's all that R1504 cares about; e may have been thinking of
the converse, where a Crime is not explicitly defined as a rule
violation (but CFJ 3126 found that it's implicitly defined).
Evidence:
omd wrote:
{I cause Mr. Incredible to change his name to '. I cause ' to
deregister. [thus destroying it; Rule 2361's first sentence arguably
enforces that Slave Golems are always players, but both Rule 869 and
the right to deregister take precedence] Now you can't get me because
selecting a confusing nickname is not defined as a Crime, and you
can't get em because e's been destroyed. Neener neener.}
