G. wrote:
I CFJ, barring D. Margaux:
D. Margaux won by apathy in the message referred to in evidence.
[this was later identified as CFJ 3676 and assigned to me]
Evidence:
Message in question:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2018-October/039320.html
Original intent:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2018-October/039261.html
Judge's arguments:
[caller's arguments, rather]
I don't think something that's within a reply, within parentheses,
in quotations, meets the standard of clarity for an action intent.
On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, D. Margaux wrote:
So, here’s a description of the most recent wins/attempted wins:
The most recent attempted win was this message, where I tried to win by apathy:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2018-October/039320.html
I think that that buried intent maybe worked—the intent was clearly labeled a
“new msg” with that specific date, rather than part of the history that it was
embedded in. I actually don’t think there’s an open CFJ about that.
I accept the caller's arguments and judge FALSE. In particular,
D. Margaux intentionally used a misleading form factor that causes some
mail readers to hide some or all of the relevant text by default, and
was presumably aware of same. This is a concrete step beyond merely
burying a separate paragraph in the middle of a long report.
