Please note that Jeremy's post is the answer agreed upon by the Knowledge Pool team, and not just one more opinion.

(Note to self (and the rest of the KP team): add some boilerplate language to all final solutions, so it's clear…)

d:^D

Well I understand the point of view of the official KP anwer.

I am just asking if my train of thoughts is flawed somewhere or if I somehow make sense.
If it is to be closed topic, I'd still like someone to explain to me by PM the validity of my post here.
I was taught that applying the IPG is very important, but if it feels very wrong doing so, deviating is a possibility, and I strongly feel that here.

And about the boilerplate part, I find it too bad that we cannot discuss the reasoning behind the KP answer if we do not understand the “why” and the “why not” in my case.

Originally posted by Théo CHENG:

I was taught that applying the IPG is very important, but if it feels very wrong doing so, deviating is a possibility

That's incorrect, actually.

IPG
The Head Judge may not deviate from this guide’s procedures except in significant and exceptional circumstances or a situation that has no applicable philosophy for guidance.

This situation, as unusual as it is, does not meet the criteria (Significant & Exceptional).

Most of all, “feels very wrong” is not valid support for deviating; it is, however, an instinct that you should consider, to see if perhaps something else is going on, maybe it's a different infraction (and remedy), maybe there's no infraction at all, etc. But don't deviate just to create a better feeling for the players, or yourself.

Originally posted by Théo CHENG:

I find it too bad that we cannot discuss the reasoning behind the KP answer

Sorry, I didn't mean to discourage further exploration of the reasons for our answer. If you still have questions, then perhaps we need to do a better job with our answer, or at least we may be assuming knowledge that not everyone has.

It appeared that your post assumed the topic was still “in progress”, without an official answer; that made me realize that Jeremy, despite all his hard work with the KP team, does not appear as an ‘O’fficial source for KP answers. We need to fix that, so everyone knows that the KP answer … and can then explore the parts they don't understand.

d:^D

OK thanks for the reply.

I guess that if I believe that backing up is not the right solution here, because I asess that backing up here would have too many unwanted consequences, I can let the game state at it is. That would be an acceptable decision here I guess.

Why wouldn't the Volcanic Island be considered a known card, and you wouldn't let it be returned to the top of the library in the rewind? What am I missing?

Double GRV's, rewind to the point of error. Given that it's a legacy open, I'd run the rewind through the HJ or anyone else designated to handle rewinds (Given that I'm at L1 at an open, the L3 that's following me around)

Edit: I should probably read all of the replies before commenting, seeing as this is closed… guess there is a FTMGS involved instead of double GRV. Oh well

Edited Olivier Jansen (Dec. 26, 2014 11:31:36 PM)

Originally posted by DJ Hirko:

Why wouldn't the Volcanic Island be considered a known card, and you wouldn't let it be returned to the top of the library in the rewind?

I defer to the author of this scenario:

Jeremy Behunin
It could be considered a known card and not subject to the rewind. However for the sake of this situation it wouldn't change the course of play once it's moving forward again. Because of that I felt it best not to clutter the answer by including it. Good catch though!

Edited Scott Marshall (Dec. 28, 2014 07:26:39 PM)