status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3728
(This document is informational only and contains no game actions).
=============================== CFJ 3728 ===============================
It would be LEGAL for me to create a proposal with text 'omd
violated Rule 2450 by creating this proposal' and no optional
attributes.
==========================================================================
Caller: omd
Judge: Trigon
Judgement: FALSE
==========================================================================
History:
Called by omd: 27 May 2019 01:30:17
Assigned to Trigon: 27 May 2019 20:14:18
Judged FALSE by Trigon: 02 Jun 2019 08:46:20
==========================================================================
Caller's Evidence:
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 6:30 PM omd wrote:
>
> I pledge not to create any proposals containing false statements for
> the next week.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge's Arguments:
This CFJ has lots of layers, so in order to help myself and the readers
understand the situation better, I will work from the inside out.
Suppose that omd pledged not to state any falsehoods and then stated
"omd violated Rule 2450 by saying this sentence." Whether this is a
violation is not easily ascertainable because it is a paradox; in fact
it is simply a slightly abstracted version of the most basic
self-reference paradox "This sentence is false."
So, moving out a layer, is it LEGAL to create a proposal that contains a
paradoxical statement after vowing to not create any proposals
containing false statements? No.
FALSE.
==========================================================================
