On Feb 7, 2019, at 2:46 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Judge's arguments for CFJ 3705 and 3706:
About half an hour ago, Gaelan attempted to win by exploiting a perceived
loophole in Rule 1728. I will now quote the relevant portion of that rule,
from the section stating the requirements for a dependent action.
1. A person (the initiator) conspicuously and without obfuscation
announced intent to perform the action, unambiguously and
clearly specifying the action and method(s) (including the
value of N and/or T for each method), at most fourteen days
earlier.
2. If the action is to be performed Without N Objections, With N
Agoran Consent, or With Notice, if the intent was announced at
least 4 days earlier
Gaelan tried to win by Apathy, using one buried intent to satisfy R1728(2)
and then another open intent to satisfy R1728(1). This relies on the assumption
that the R1728(1) and R1728(2) intents can be separate from each other.
However, this is not the case. While R1728(1) specifies merely (and somewhat
ungrammatically) that the initiator must have "announced intent",
R1728(2) discusses requirements for "the intent". The use of the definite
article in R1728(2) means that the intent used to satisfy it must be the
same one previously mentioned, i.e. the same one used to satisfy
R1728(1). Thus, Gaelan cannot use one intent to satisfy R1728(1) and a
different intent to satisfy R1728(2).
I would like to congratulate Gaelan on finding the bug in Rule 2465,
"Victory by Apathy", that means the same intent can be used infinitely many
times. However, as the theory underlying the victory is faulty, I rule
both these cases FALSE.
Judge's Evidence:
Rule 2465/0 (Power=0.3)
Victory by Apathy
A player CAN Declare Apathy without objection, specifying a set of
players. Upon doing so, the specified players win the game.
Rule 1728/40 (Power=3)
Dependent Actions
A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to perform
an action by a set of one or more of the following methods (N is 1
unless otherwise specified):
1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no greater
than 8. ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this method with
N = 1.)
2. With N Support, where N is a positive integer. ("With
Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
with a minimum of 1.
4. With Notice.
5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
thereby allows em to perform the action by announcement if all of
the following are true:
1. A person (the initiator) conspicuously and without obfuscation
announced intent to perform the action, unambiguously and
clearly specifying the action and method(s) (including the
value of N and/or T for each method), at most fourteen days
earlier.
2. If the action is to be performed Without N Objections, With N
Agoran Consent, or With Notice, if the intent was announced at
least 4 days earlier
3. If the action is to be performed With T Notice, if the intent
was announced at least T earlier.
4. At least one of the following is true:
1. The performer is the initiator.
2. The initiator was authorized to perform the action due to
holding a rule-defined position now held by the performer.
3. The initiator is authorized to perform the action, the
action depends on support, the performer has supported the
intent, and the rule authorizing the performance does not
explicitly prohibit supporters from performing it.
5. Agora is Satisfied with the announced intent, as defined by
other rules.
6. If a set of conditions for the performance of the action was
given in the announcement of intent to perform the action, all
those conditions are met.
Such an action is known as a dependent action. The actor SHOULD
publish a list of supporters if the action depends on support, and
a list of objectors if it depends on objections.
