I claim a 5 coin reward for judging CFJ 3744 and also a 5 coin reward for judging CFJ 3745
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 3:54 PM Rebecca <[email protected]> wrote: > I judge CFJs 3744 and CFJ 3745 FALSE for the reasons below. > > Proposals (including this one), are usually styled as follows > "Title: > Coauthors > AI > Text" > > In this case, the proposals specified an invalid AI. This shorthand has > long been in use, but in my opinion, this case turns on what that shorthand > actually means. It could mean one of two things. "I create a proposal with > the following Title, Coauthors, AI, and Text properties". If that were the > correct reading of this shorthand, one of those properties being invalid > would clearly doom the whole proposal because a proposal could not exist > that did, in fact, have all of the properties specified. If it means "I > create a proposal with the following text. I optionally specify an AI. I > optionally specify a Title. I optionally specify coauthors", then an > invalid AI would plainly doom only the optional specification, because this > is very clearly four speech acts. I find no reason that both methods should > not be available to Agorans if they so choose (just as severabilty, at > American law, can be a choice of legislatures). But which usually applies? > > It's a very difficult question for proposals which the author states > simply "I create this proposal". But in this case, I need not make a > choice, because this proposal's creator stated " I create a proposal with > the following attributes and text". If one of the "following attributes" is > invalid, the proposal does not have "the following attributes and text", > and so the author cannot have created anything. It is IMPOSSIBLE to create > a proposal with an AI of 0.5, and so it was IMPOSSIBLE for a proposal to > have "the following attributes and text", and so no proposal ever existed. > > Based on the specific text used here to create this proposal, I hold that > the author's speech act created no proposal. I hold both CFJs FALSE. > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:36 PM Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I assign CFJ 3744 to R. Lee. >> I assign CFJ 3745 to R. Lee. >> >> On 7/10/2019 5:03 AM, Rebecca wrote: >> > I haven't gotten a cfj in a while. maybe it's because my judgements are >> > never clear xD >> >> You had a little self-interest on the last couple cases that were called, >> but otw you were on top of the list for next case. :) >> >> > > -- > From R. Lee > -- >From R. Lee
