On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 08:36:54PM -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: > On 5/17/21 12:00 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: > > The below CFJ is 3905. I assign it to Jason. > > > > status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3905 > > > > =============================== CFJ 3905 =============================== > > > > With the above-quoted message, Trigon revoked 400 Coins from > > Falsifian. > > > > ========================================================================== > > > > Caller: Falsifian > > > > Judge: Jason > > > > ========================================================================== > > > I assign the following judgment in CFJ 3905 and in CFJ 3906 (modified > from draft by trimming down a lot): > > { > > Rule 2545 states that "When the rules authorize a person (the > auctioneer) to conduct an auction, e CAN do so by any wholly public > method [...]". This clause is separate from the clause that authorizes > the transfer or creation of the auctioned items, so it can provide more > authorization than that clause. I find that this clause is extremely > broad. Based on its plain text, it enables any auction method that is > "wholly public", "generally recognizable", "fair", "equitable", and > "timely", and that "determin[es] the auction winners from among the > current players" and "enable[s] the appropriate exchange of goods". I > find that this enabling recurses into the actions permitted by the > auction method, as Rule 2545 enables the auctioneer to "conduct an > auction", not just to ultimately transfer the goods. In this case, > conducting an auction, as defined by the auction method, necessitates > revoking coins and creating a new Victory Card, so Rule 2545 implicitly > authorizes those auctions. > > In order to determine whether this clause applies, however, it must be > determined whether the method of the purported Victory Auction satisfies > the requirements of an auction: > * Wholly public: Clearly yes. > * Generally recognizable: Clearly yes. > * Fair and equitable: I believe yes, and the fact that the auction > method was enshrined into regulation indicates that the populace as a > whole believes so, too. > * Timely: I believe it's timely enough, so yes. > * Determining the auction winners from among the current players: > Clearly yes. > * Enabling the appropriate exchange of goods: Yes, but this requires > explanation. > > AM0/2 says the following about the distribution message: > { > In this message, the auctioneer > CAN and SHALL destroy the amount to be paid from the inventory > each awardee and transfer to that player (or create in eir > possession if the item is new) the set of assets associated with > the lot e won. > } > > This does not provide an explicit method to perform the destruction and > transfer. Based on Rule 2545's request that "auction methods should be > interpreted in the name of fairness with deference to the method's clear > intent, if intent can be reasonably inferred.", I find that the auction > method permits ISID transference and destruction, despite the fact that > rule text would not allow it under Rule 2125, as the intent is clearly > to allow an ISID transfer. Though the caller raises the question of > whether the auction method was defined by auction regulation at the time > of the resolution of the auction. I find that whether it is or not is > irrelevant. Even if the auction method was to be interpreted as rules > text, the clause that authorizes interpretation using "clear intent" > appears later and thus takes precedence. > > The Victory Auction satisfies the requirements of an auction, and the > second paragraph of Rule 2545 authorizes the destruction of the bids and > creation of a new Victory Card. > > CFJ 3905 judged TRUE. > CFJ 3906 judged TRUE. > > [0]: > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2021-May/014878.html > > } > > -- > Jason Cobb > > Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Looks great; thanks for the updated version. -- Falsifian
