On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 03:12:18PM +1000, Rebecca Lee via agora-business wrote:
> I call a CFJ: Each player may claim a justice card this Agoran week.
>
> Rule 2478 states in relevant part "The player who initiated the most Finger
> Pointings that resulted
>
> in a Warning, Indictment, or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous
> Agoran Week CAN once grant emself a Justice Card by announcement."
>
> The rule provides nothing about ties. Last Agoran week, everybody was
> tied in having pointed 0 such fingers. Does that mean everyone gets
> one, or that only a singular 'player' can get one?
>
>
> --
> From R. Lee
I don't think it works, but just in case:
I grant myself a Justice Card.
Gratuitous argument:
{
I suspect this is either DISMISS or PARADOXICAL.
Wiktionary's first definition for "the" is:
Definite grammatical article that implies necessarily that an
entity it articulates is presupposed; something already mentioned,
or completely specified later in that same sentence, or assumed
already completely specified.
Under this definition, the rule text includes an assertion that exactly
one player initiated the most such Finger Pointings. The rule says that
that person CAN grant emself a Justice Card.
With this contradiction, I can arrive at both FALSE and TRUE.
FALSE: I didn't point any fingers, so I'm certainly not the unique
player who pointed the most, therefore someone else must have pointed
more. So I can't claim one.
TRUE: Nobody else pointed any fingers, so nobody else could be the
unique player who pointed the most, so it must be me --- I can claim
one. Repeat this argument for every other player.
If this reasoning is to be allowed, then PARADOXICAL is appropriate.
However, the reasoning may be disallowed by R217, which allows only
"direct, forward reasoning". In this case, I suspect there is no
allowed reasoning that can arrive at FALSE or TRUE. If I'm right about
that, DISMISS is the only appropriate option left to the judge. (I
don't think IRRELEVENT or INSUFFICIENT are appropriate here.)
I'll note there's another, less trouble definition of "the" on
Wiktionary:
Introducing a singular term to be taken generically: preceding a
name of something standing for a whole class.
Under this definition, "the player who initiated ... CAN once grant
emself a Justice Card" would mean that any player who initiated the
most finger pointings Can do so; in this sentence, "the player" is a
generic player, and information follows about whether any given player
is eligible. I guess then the answer depends on whether "most" allows a
tie.
But I don't think this definition applies. It's a much less common use
of "the", sixth in Wiktionary's list. The only reason to prefer it over
#1 is that #1 leads to a contradiction, but R217 doesn't let us reason
in that direction.
}
--
Falsifian
