Judge's Arguments for CFJ 3759 The caller's arguments boil down to a contention that every public message publishes every possible statement. If this is the case, the games is deeply and fundamentally broken (or ossified, triggering AiaN protections).
The caller's basis for this seemingly absurd argument is Rule 478, which states in part "A person "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message." Read as a definition, this clearly says "To publish X is to send a public message." If that were the text in the rules, I would be obliged to agree with the caller. However, it is not, and there are other possible readings. If someone remarks that "One gets to the store by walking", it is not the conclusion of an informed listener that all acts of walking need lead to the store. Instead, a listener is more likely to read walking as a necessary, rather than sufficient condition for reaching the store. Ordinarily, in an Agoran context, I would be inclined to to read R478 the same way the caller does. However, the statement the caller cites in R478 is ambiguous, as there are multiple possible interpretations of its meaning. This means that I am obliged to consult Rule 217, "Interpreting the Rules", which says in part "Where the text [of the rules] is silent, inconsistent, or unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game." Past judgements have never ruled on this matter. Both common sense and game custom would suggest that R478 identifies a necessary condition, rather than a necessary and sufficient one. However, the truly overriding concern here is the interest of the game. If the caller's arguments were correct, the game would be ossified, and we'd have to figure out whether AiaN or the provision at issue were older. Thus, the interests of the game are such a large element in this case that whichever interpretation best supports them must be chosen; the fact that the other factors agree is mere icing on the cake. So, what does this mean for the game? Rule 478 states an necessary condition; not a sufficient one, and thus publishing can only be done in public messages. To work out what conditions are sufficient, we must rely on common sense. It seems logical that to publish X, a person must send a message containing X. R478 merely adds a requirement that that message must be public. Jason Cobb did not publish any message stating eir intent to declare victory by apathy. Accordingly, e could not declare apathy. FALSE. Judge's Evidence Rule 217/12 (Power=3) Interpreting the Rules When interpreting and applying the rules, the text of the rules takes precedence. Where the text is silent, inconsistent, or unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game. Definitions and prescriptions in the rules are only to be applied using direct, forward reasoning; in particular, an absurdity that can be concluded from the assumption that a statement about rule-defined concepts is false does not constitute proof that it is true. Definitions in lower-powered Rules do not overrule common-sense interpretations or common definitions of terms in higher-powered rules, but may constructively make reasonable clarifications to those definitions. For this purpose, a clarification is reasonable if and only if it adds detail without changing the underlying general meaning of the term and without causing the higher powered rule to be read in a way inconsistent with its text. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, any rule change that would (1) prevent a person from initiating a formal process to resolve matters of controversy, in the reasonable expectation that the controversy will thereby be resolved; or (2) prevent a person from causing formal reconsideration of any judicial determination that e should be punished, is wholly void and without effect.
