Kate wrote:
Mischief wrote:
I CFJ on the following statement: there is an election for Promotor in
progress, and Trigon is a candidate in that election.
This is CFJ 4115. I assign it to Murphy.
Original CFJ and caller's arguments:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2025-June/054354.html
Gratuitous arguments from Trigon:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2025-June/054355.html
Gratuitous arguments from Mischief:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2025-June/064868.html
Becoming a candidate doesn't fit Rule 1728's definition of Tabled
Actions, but it makes sense to "intend" (in the ordinary-language sense)
to do so.
Had the original message been worded like
"I intend to, with 2 support, start an election for Promotor and
become a candidate."
then we could more reasonably interpret it as
"I intend to X and Y."
-> "(I intend to X) and (I intend to Y)."
-> "(I intend, in the R1728 sense, to X) and (I intend, in the
ordinary-language sense, to Y)."
but it was actually worded as
"I table an intent to, with 2 support, start an election for Promotor
and become a candidate."
which, at best, requires an extra level of interpretation.
More significantly, it's unclear whether Cosmo intended (in the
ordinary-language sense) for performing the tabled action to make
*Cosmo* a candidate, even if someone else performed it. That's not
possible, but Cosmo may not have realized that.
I find that this did not meet Rule 1728's standard for clarity, thus
the election was not initiated, thus I judge FALSE.
I intend, with two support, to initiate an election for Promotor.
I unofficially intend not to end the Promotor election or initiate
voting on it until Cosmo and Trigon have both had a reasonable
opportunity to become candidates.
--
[ANSC H:GE V:G B:0]
