Since I brought up the other communications-related CFJs today, a note/
gratuitous argument on this one:

If the rules are "a person CAN do X by announcement"  the "action by
announcement" standard is entirely in R478:
                  a person performs that action by unambiguously and
      clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs it.

Our current precedents around R478 on its own are that "clearly specify"
might include references, indirect quantities like "all", or maybe minor
mistakes, etc., as long as it's reasonably unambiguous what action was
being intended.[1]  This case is a "by announcement" like that.  (not
saying that this communication does or doesn't meet the standard, just
pointing it out).

The actions I raised earlier today were a bit different:  there, each
rule listed explicit information that had to be included in the message,
e.g. "state how many assets e earns" for Rewards or "include that it's
act-on-behalf in the message" (for acting on behalf of persons - doesn't
apply to spaceships).

[1]
This didn't used to be the case.  Judge Elysion, in CFJ 1307, explicitly
found that the common dictionary definition of "specify" meant that
references like "all" wouldn't work.  This was never explicitly
overturned, we just forgot about/ignored this precedent in CFJs of the
last few years.
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1307


On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 9:47 AM Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I could possibly scrap more people's actions/battle attempts with this but
> I can't be assed to dig through emails.
>
> > I spend 3 energy to move to sector (4->5 5->6 6->7).
>
> It's not players who spend energy to move, it's ships. And you can cause
> the ship to make a payment to move.
>
> From Rule 2592/0:
>
>       Any player CAN, by announcement, cause a Pilotable Spaceship e
>       owns to pay 1 Energy to move to a Sector adjacent to its Location.
>
> I CFJ: Gaelan's (only) ship is at Sector 4.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:59 PM Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote:
>
> > Good catch. I initiate a space battle with twg, to be resolved by D.
> > Margaux.
> >
> > Gaelan
> >
> > > On Jan 30, 2019, at 9:15 AM, D. Margaux <dmargaux...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > FWIW, I think this is ineffective because it does not specify the
> > resolver
> > >
> > >> On Jan 30, 2019, at 12:14 PM, Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I spend 3 energy to move to sector (4->5 5->6 6->7).
> > >>
> > >> I initiate a space battle with twg.
> > >>
> > >> Contract under rules should twg accept: the parties SHALL, in a timely
> > fashion after agreement of this contract, communicate their energy
> > expenditure to the battleā€™s resolver in a private email containing their
> > desired expenditure as a positive integer, expressed as one or two Arabic
> > numerals.
> > >>
> > >> Gaelan
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to