I raised the issue in Slack, and I think it’s worth voting on as a CfJ. Should the representations of clients by idle Attorneys have been listed when processing “Open Book”?

Without these representations listed, and with “Clients” now making the list the canonical location of all representations, unidling Attorneys will lose their clients. This component of the gamestate is currently lost in the translation of processing Open Book.

But, I think it would have been incorrect by the letter of the rule to have listed them, since the rule did not count idle Attorneys (“For the purposes of all Gamestate and the Ruleset, excluding Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “Attorneys”, “Dynasties”, “Fair Play” and any of those Rules’ subrules, Idle Attorneys are not counted as Attorneys.”), and their list of Clients is a property of the un-counted Attorney. Also, once the Clients that idle Attorneys represent has been posted, it can’t be unposted. So because of the ambiguity here, I sided with not posting them. But the option should be open to do so.