On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:

Finally, CFJ 866 seems to be relevant background reading too (and also
supports this verdict), and may be responsible for the TDoC confusion
(in that it holds that the /recipient's/ TDoC is what matters, not
the /sender's/ TDoC).

FWIW IMO as the original Judge, CFJ 866 holds that it is the recipient's TDoC that matters for when a message is _received_. Whether Agora chooses to let a message take effect when sent or when received is a different matter, which may have changed during the years - I vaguely think that at the time votes may have been defined to take effect when _received_ by the Assessor. Also note that at the time voting was allowed to be in private, thus public fora were not involved.

I would correspondingly find it natural for the TDoC of the sender to be consulted for when a message is _sent_, if the rules were otherwise silent, which however they currently are not (date stamps), albeit in a not very clarifying way.


Reply via email to