On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 09:44 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Ed Murphy wrote: > > ais523 wrote: > >> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 09:26 -0800, Ed Murphy wrote: > >>> Rule 2150 does not specify the type or quality of the translation > >>> service. Also, English-to-Hungarian-to-English is not an ideal test > >>> of native-Hungarian-to-English. > >> Rule 2150 requires me to be able to participate via a translation > >> service. Because my native language is English and I don't know enough > >> of any other language to be able to participate from it and translate, I > >> therefore have to translate twice to be able to participate via a > >> translation service. > > > > Oh, so you're interpreting R2150 as "must include". Again, though, this > > is trivially satisfied by your theoretical ability to hire one or more > > sufficiently competent human translators. > > And this is ironic in a way. So what we have is that if a translation > service is suitably bad, we would judge that the translation service does > not communicate in a reasonable manner sufficiently understandable to the > typical player, and therefore doesn't produce clear communications. Which > means we still judge participation based on whether the communication is > suitably understandable to a "typical, reasonable" Agoran, not on whether it > was in English or purported English --- which means the "English" > clause is meaningless, we're still in the situation we were in before > English became > our official language. Which is just fine, I never liked the English mandate > anyway.
Note that it seems that at least one party to an Agoran contract (RainerWasserfuhr) has German, rather than English, as a first language; I don't know how good eir English is. Probably tangential to this debate, though. -- ais523
