Thinking about this. It's more about policy philosophy as the scenario is quite simple:

Anna casts Glimpse the Future, then proceeds looking at the top three cards of her library. The puts one of them into her hand and the rest on the bottom of her library. A moment later she calls for a Judge.

What she did: she resolved Anticipate instead of Glimpse the Future.

It's GPE-GRV-> Warning, now to the fix, our options:

Options:
1. Everything stays as it is now. Shit happens.
2. Partial fix. Not available, the identity of the cards was not known by all players.
3. Full backup. Meh. We move those two cards on top, the one random card from Anna's hand to the top also, then resolve Glimpse.

My take is 3 is not a valid option, and I'd like to apply the partial fix even if the identity of those cards is not known.
Why?
- Both players can point at those two cards and say “them!”.
- The potential for abuse is not the same as in a DEC infraction, where the identity MUST be known to fix things and downgrade to Warning.
- This partial fix basically cover every GRV that moved cards to any zone that's not a player's hand.

Here is the partial fix, for reference:

If an object changing zones is put into the wrong zone, the identity of the object was known to all players, and it can be moved without disrupting the state of the game, put the object in the correct zone.

Should we move to this:

If an object changing zones is put into the wrong zone, the position of the object is known to all players, and it can be moved without disrupting the state of the game, put the object in the correct zone.

I'd like to see your opinions (and counterexamples invalidating my take on a rewording of the partial fix) :>

Thanks everyone,
A.

Edited Andrea Mondani (June 8, 2015 06:04:34 AM)

Originally posted by Andrea Mondani:

3. Full backup. Meh. We move those two cards on top, the one random card from Anna's hand to the top also, then resolve Glimpse.

Hello, Andrea.

Full backup, as I understand it, implies undoing actions until the point when error was made. In your scenario it is in the middle of the resolution of Glimpse, and not the very beginning of it. So if you would stick to this solution, it would mean, basically, to return to the point when the card is chosen and the other two are to be put somewhere.

In this case full backup is no more a “meh” solution and doesn't really change the flow of the game or the decisions that could have been made (because, perhaps, the error was caught immediately).

Regards,
Lev

If the information was ever in a position where opponents had the opportunity to verify the legality (such as on top of the library, as the only card in hand, or on the battlefield at the end of the game), do not upgrade the penalty and reveal the information if possible.

Based on that - if we fetch for a card with Enlightenment Tutor and forget to reveal it before putting it on top, as long as it wouldn't be drawn, identity of that card is still known to us (“hey, that's that one on top”) so I don't see reason why not to apply to cards at bottom of library.

However, I find there another problem with applying that partial fix

. If an object changing zones is put into the wrong zone

our two cards hadn't changed zone, they are still in library, so as Annotated IPG says:

This does not apply to cards that were supposed to change zones but didn't.

EDIT: I did not consider that we should backup only partially through the spell, so I deleted the rest of my post to avoid confusion.

Edited Mats Törnros (June 10, 2015 05:56:10 AM)

After some thinking and looking for wording in IPG:

To perform a backup, each individual action since the point of the error is reversed, starting with the most recent ones and working backwards.

We have:

1 looking at three cards
2 putting one in hand
3 putting rest at bottom

Clearly #3 is our point of error, therefore we could perform proper backup just like Lev suggested - just put that 2 cards back to the top, and then resolve rest of that spell correctly by putting “rest” in to graveyard.
Main question there: is an action casting spell as a whole or can we divided spell into more actions - I would lean to the latter one.

Edited Bartłomiej Wieszok (June 8, 2015 12:19:11 PM)

Originally posted by Andrea Mondani:

2. Partial fix. Not available, the identity of the cards was not known by all players.

You are talking yourself out of this when you don't need to. “These two” is a perfectly adequate description of the cards on the bottom of the library, just like “this one” is a perfectly adequate description of which face-down creature entered the battlefield first.

Originally posted by Joshua Feingold:

Andrea Mondani
2. Partial fix. Not available, the identity of the cards was not known by all players.

You are talking yourself out of this when you don't need to. “These two” is a perfectly adequate description of the cards on the bottom of the library, just like “this one” is a perfectly adequate description of which face-down creature entered the battlefield first.

This is what I thought at first. But looking at DEC infraction, identity (when downgrading) means something else, i.e. all players have to know what that card is.

The partial fix I suggest *IS* the partial fix if “identity” has to be intended that way, but if so I think we should at least clear up the terminology on the IPG using different words for different meanings (as suggested in the OP).

Makes sense?

I would stick to the new “simple backup” rule. I think taking two cards from the bottom of the library and putting them into the graveyard is simple enough.

You can find some information on simple backups here: DTK Policy Changes.

To be honest I don't see the difference between backing up to the point of error (putting cards into the wrong zone) and this simple backup (since the fix is the same), but I think it makes more sense when you are looking from small backup perspective.

Edited Alexey Chernyshov (June 9, 2015 08:04:44 AM)

Why are we opting to back up to the card choice? The “point of error” was putting the 2 cards on the bottom of the library. I second Josh's approach that “these 2” fulfills the partial fix of knowing which cards are in the wrong zone, but if you disagree with that then why back up past the point of error?

Selecting a card and putting it in his hand was ine. Don't worry too much about “put one into your hand AND the rest in your graveyard” as a single action, because in reality it's 2 physical actions.

Many have perceptively identified the “point of error” can be during the resolution of a spell or ability, and there's little to be gained in backing up to resolve the WHOLE THING again from the beginning. Find the point of the error, reverse all actions after that point, and proceed from there.

Edited Evan Cherry (June 9, 2015 09:13:50 AM)