The below CFJ is 4042. I assign it to G..
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#4042
=============================== CFJ 4042 ===============================
At the time the Assessor first attempted to resolve the Agoran
decision about whether to adopt proposal 8989, ais523's vote on
that proposal resolved to PRESENT.
==========================================================================
Caller: ais523
Judge: G.
==========================================================================
History:
Called by ais523: 05 Jun 2023 00:19:23
Assigned to G.: [now]
==========================================================================
Caller's Arguments:
Rule 2127 requires a conditional vote to be "determinate" in
order to avoid evaluating to PRESENT. Rule 2518 requires a value to be
reasonably determinable from information reasonably available to be
determinate.
Were my rice holdings actually determinate at this point? There has
been mass confusion (and several CFJs) regarding how the rice rules
actually work, with at least two CFJs unresolved at the time of the
attempted resolution. The Ricemastor is inactive, and has missed
reports. Some people have taken to attempting to sign Rice Plans using
lots of different wordings in the same message, in the apparent hope
that at least one of them will work.
Further evidence is that the Assessor appeared to be in sufficient
doubt about my Rice holdings that e immediately CoEd eir own
resolution, referring the situation to CFJ – this implies that it was
unreasonable for em to determine my Rice holding, otherwise e would
probably have done so. (In general, it seems that although it's
reasonable to tie a report to a CFJ outcome, it is unreasonable to do
the same for a conditional vote.)
==========================================================================
