> =============================== CFJ 3823 ============================= > > I am currently obligated to publish a report detailing the values > of Karma switches as of some point in the previous Agoran week. > > =========================================================================
I judge CFJ 3823 as follows: This Judge apologizes for unclear wording in CFJ 3798. To be clear, in this text: > If any information is defined by the rules as part of that > person's weekly report, then e SHALL maintain all such > information, and the publication of all such information is > part of eir weekly duties. "SHALL maintain" is a duty with no deadline, time limit or window. Therefore, whether a record is "maintained" or not is evaluated continuously, and is in reference to the present moment (i.e. "is the record currently being maintained"). My judicial comments on "within the time frame" in CFJ 3798 were meant in terms of setting an interpretive standard for the term "maintained". In general, if the overall information is to be published weekly, the information is "maintained" if it is up to date to within a week (of the publication moment) and evidence that the information is "maintained" is the existence of such a publication. Secondly, time limits and deadlines are time limits for obligations, not part obligations (for the purpuse of deputisation, for example). So the duty is not to "maintain information for a certain week" but to "maintain information" and by definition, it's not "maintained information" if it's more than week old (counting back from the time of publication). This is what I meant by "within the time frame" in the CFJ 3798 judgement. Therefore, publishing "maintained information" as part of "weekly duties" consists of publishing information that is "maintained" by being no more than a week old in reference to the moment of publication (the message date, not the report date, if they differ), and doing so satisfies every past duty to do so. The caller, at the time, was obliged to publish a report that was out of date by no more than a week. This *could* have been accomplished by publishing values up to date within the previous week OR the current week (but no older than the previous week for a weekly duty). So the obligation is not explicitly to maintain/publish last week's values. FALSE.
