> Here are my initial proto-judgement, but I am definitely open to being
> persuaded otherwise:
> * * *
> Caller's arguement depends on the idea that to "Declare Apathy" means
> the same thing as to "announce" or "publish apathy."  I don't
> necessarily agree with that, and so I would judge FALSE.
> The word declaration has several meanings.  In the context of Rule
> 2465, I think "to Declare Apathy" is  a kind of a speech-act: it is a
> statement that causes a particular social fact to come into existence
> (in this case, it creates a victory by Apathy).  It has a similar form
> as when a wedding officiant says "I declare you man and wife," or when
> a monarch says "I declare war on [country]," or when the chair of a
> legislative body says "I declare that the legislative session is
> adjourned."
> In each of these examples, the declaration works only if certain
> preconditions are met.  The wedding officiant must be vested with some
> legal, religious, or other kind of authority to perform the marriage,
> and the bride and groom need to express consent and have a valid
> marriage license--otherwise the declaration is void.  The monarch must
> be vested with the power to declare war, and may lack authority to do
> so in a constitutional monarchy.  The chair must actually be
> recognized as legitimately presiding over the legislative body, and
> certain rules typically must be followed before an adjournment can be
> declared.
> If authority is lacking, the declaration is void.  So if I were to say
> (or announce or publish), "I declare Donald Trump and Hillary Rodham
> Clinton to be married," or "I declare war on BlogNomic on behalf of
> Agora," or "I declare the U.S. Congress to be adjourned," we would all
> immediately understand why the declarations are void.
> So too here.  Under certain circumstances, Rule 2465 vests a player
> with authority to declare a particular social fact to come into
> existence--a victory by Apathy.  The key question is under what
> circumstances does that Rule create authority to Declare Apathy?  The
> Rule says that "[a] player CAN Declare Apathy without objection,
> specifying a set of players."  In my view, "without objection" must be
> read as a precondition that must be satisfied before a player is
> vested with authority to Declare Apathy.
> So what does "without objection" mean?  Well, Rule 1728 says that "a
> rule that purports to allow a person to perform an action [without
> objection] thereby allows em to perform the action by announcement"
> provided certain conditions are met.  Here, those conditions are
> plainly not met (and not merely because dependent intents are
> currently temporarily broken). So, I think the declaration sadly must
> fail (which is regrettable because a TRUE judgement would also give me
> a win by Apathy from December 2018).

That's great reasoning, thanks. Taking those examples into account, I
agree that it's a stretch to say that I declared apathy (or "apathy")
simply by announcing or publishing it.

Reply via email to