Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Aspen via agora-business]

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 4:15 PM Falsifian via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 12:10:23AM +1000, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> > Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to
> > determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> >
> > For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method
> is
> > first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are
> listed
> > below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)
> >   * AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
> >   * REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
> >   * REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> > The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED
> > QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.
>
> I vote PRESENT.
>

I vote REMAND.

-Aspen

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Falsifian via agora-business]

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 12:10:23AM +1000, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to
> determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> 
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method is
> first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are listed
> below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)
>   * AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
>   * REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
>   * REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED
> QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.

I vote PRESENT.

-- 
Falsifian

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[D. Wet via agora-business]

28 aug. 2021 16:10:23 Telna via agora-official 
:


Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.


For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method 
is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences 
are listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional 
votes)

   * AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
   * REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
   * REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED 
QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.


CFJ 3922 and the judgement in question are quoted below for 
convenience, along with the intent to enter it into Moot.


On 2021-08-03 15:55, Aspen via agora-business wrote:

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 9:31 AM D. Wet via agora-business
 wrote:


I propose to create a new Rule in the Agoran commmunity to be adopted
according to the current rule adoption procedure. The Rule is:

Onboarding of Newly Activated Players

1. Newly Activated Players MUST be requested to take their first 
Action

in a timely fashion after being switched to Active.

2. Players that are Active less than one month MUST actively be 
educated

when their Action is IMPOSSIBLE within the current Ruleset.

3. The education in referred to in 2. MUST contain references to N
specific Rules numbers as to why their Action is ILLEGAL within the
current Ruleset. N is at least 1 and at most 3 and NEED NOT to lead 
to a

POSSIBLE Action when taken into account during the next try to act.

I'm afraid it's a bit unclear whether this worked. Submitting
proposals is governed by Rule 2350. There's specific information that
needs to be specified when you create a proposal. A lot of it is
optional, but the one thing that's absolutely essential is the text.
Here, it's unclear where the text of the proposal begins and ends.
I CFJ "D. Wet has created a proposal in the last 7 days."
-Aspen


On 2021-08-25 11:37, Sarah S. via agora-business wrote:
D. Wet attempted to create a proposal in an unorthodox manner. Eir 
message

is quoted below.
[snip]
The question is whether this message is a proposal. A proposal CAN be
created by announcement, specifying its text (a proposal is a body of
text). Per rule 2350 other attributes may be specified as well, but 
these

are irrelevant here.
Usually text would be specified with quotation marks, brackets or the 
like.
Nonetheless, the words that are meant to be proposal text are clear to 
me

here. The message begins "I propose to", which are action words that
effectuate the requirement to announce. The rest of it is text that is
clearly meant to be proposal text ('create a new rule...') as they 
would
only have function inside a proposal. The process of 'specifying' 
proposal
text just needs to clearly distinguish text that's inside the proposal 
from

text that's outside of it. In this case the words "I propose to" are
clearly separated from the rest of the message's text not by 
formatting or
punctuation but by the purpose they serve. These words serve the 
functional
purpose of announcing the proposal while the other text only makes 
sense as

proposal text (this is clear to any reasonable Agoran reader).
'Specify' and 'clearly specify' are synonyms, as a specification will 
make
clear exactly what text is meant to be proposal text. If this is 
clear,

then obviously text is both specified and clearly specified.
I judge CFJ 3922 TRUE

--
R. Lee


On 2021-08-28 17:11, Aspen via agora-business wrote:

I intend, with 2 support, to enter this judgement into moot.
At this point, y'all are probably getting the feeling that I really
don't want this to be a proposal. That's sort of true. My personal
opinion is that this proposal didn't work, because to me the creation
of the proposal seemed ambiguous. However, I do have a more specific
reason for discontentment with this judgement.
I believe that the proposed reading fails to make sense of the text.
The first sentence of the message reads "I propose to create a new
Rule in the Agoran commmunity to be adopted according to the current
rule adoption procedure." There is no sign in the punctuation of that
sentence that it should be split in two, with one part introducing a
proposal and the other part comprising the proposal's text. In fact,
to make this work, the reading actually has to break apart an
infinitive, leaving a dangling "to" that isn't really doing anything.
It just doesn't make syntactic sense. I realize that it does make
semantic sense, but I don't think we should ignore the clear
formatting of a message just because doing so produces a desired
result.
I'd like to pause here to note how extraordinary this interpretation
is. When I looked at this message, it did not even occur to me that
this interpretation was possible, despite the fact that I spent some
time thinking over possible 

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Sarah S. via agora-business]

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 6:25 AM ATMunn via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> On 8/28/2021 10:10, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> > Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to
> > determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> >
> > For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method
> > is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are
> > listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)
> >* AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
> >* REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
> >* REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> > The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED
> > QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.
> >
>
> I vote PRESENT.
>
> --
> ATMunn
> friendly neighborhood notary :)
>

I vote to AFFIRM because I don't think any substantive arguments have been
raised that I didn't address in the judgement. I will interpret a vote to
remand as an indication that I should reach the opposite conclusion,
probably.
-- 
--
R. Lee

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[ATMunn via agora-business]

On 8/28/2021 10:10, Telna via agora-official wrote:
Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.


For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method 
is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are 
listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)

   * AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
   * REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
   * REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED 
QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.




I vote PRESENT.

--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary :)

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

On 8/28/2021 7:10 AM, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
> determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> 
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method 
> is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are 
> listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)
>* AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
>* REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
>* REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED 
> QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.

I vote AFFIRM.  The Judge should have eir say and presumption of taking
eir turn - this does not come anywhere near the standard of mistake to
overrule em, even if you would have judged differently.

-G.

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[ais523 via agora-business]

On Sun, 2021-08-29 at 00:10 +1000, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision
> to determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> 
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting
> method is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their
> consequences are listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> conditional votes)
>* AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
>* REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
>* REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of
> FAILED QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.

I vote REMAND. I think the judgement mostly makes sense, but the "to be
adopted according to the current rule adoption procedure" doesn't make
much sense in a proposal and the judgement hasn't taken this into
account – this is a point that should have been addressed.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Cuddle Beam via agora-business]

I vote FOR all

On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 6:08 PM Rose Strong via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> I vote REMAND.
>
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 11:50 AM Trigon via agora-business <
> agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > On 8/28/21 2:10 PM, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> > > Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to
> > > determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
> >
> > I vote PRESENT. The judgement is fine with me. I do find myself a little
> > weary of the battle fought over it, though, especially because we're
> > dealing with a new player. But I'm going to let everyone else who has
> > stronger opinions here decide so that we'll stop fighting about it.
> >
> > --
> > Trigon
> >
> >   ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST
> >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> > I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
> > I LOVE SPAGHETTI
> > transfer Jason one coin
> > nch was here
> > I hereby
> > don't... trust... the dragon...
> > don't... trust... the dragon...
> > Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
> >
>

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Rose Strong via agora-business]

I vote REMAND.

On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 11:50 AM Trigon via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> On 8/28/21 2:10 PM, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> > Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to
> > determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
>
> I vote PRESENT. The judgement is fine with me. I do find myself a little
> weary of the battle fought over it, though, especially because we're
> dealing with a new player. But I'm going to let everyone else who has
> stronger opinions here decide so that we'll stop fighting about it.
>
> --
> Trigon
>
>   ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST
>
> 
> 
> 
>
> I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
> I LOVE SPAGHETTI
> transfer Jason one coin
> nch was here
> I hereby
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
>

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Trigon via agora-business]

On 8/28/21 2:10 PM, Telna via agora-official wrote:
Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.


I vote PRESENT. The judgement is fine with me. I do find myself a little 
weary of the battle fought over it, though, especially because we're 
dealing with a new player. But I'm going to let everyone else who has 
stronger opinions here decide so that we'll stop fighting about it.


--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST





I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Jason Cobb via agora-business]

On 8/28/21 10:10, Telna via agora-official wrote:
> Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
> determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.
>
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, the voting method 
> is first-past-the-post, and the valid options and their consequences are 
> listed below. (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes)
>* AFFIRM - uphold R. Lee's judgement as final
>* REMAND - reopen the case for reconsideration by R. Lee
>* REMIT  - reopen the case, recusing and barring R. Lee
> The quorum for this decision is 6. Please note that a result of FAILED 
> QUORUM is treated identically to AFFIRM.


I vote REMAND.

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, S​tonemason

BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)

[Telna via agora-business]

On 2021-08-29 00:10, Telna via agora-official wrote:
Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to 
determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922.


I vote PRESENT.