On Sun, 2008-07-06 at 02:08 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ============================== CFJ 2062 ==============================
>
> The contract Ivan Hope just agreed to is a pledge because it
> states "Guvf vf n cyrqtr.", which is "This is a pledge." in
> rot13.
>
> ========================================================================
I judge CFJ 2062 as follows:
The relevant rules here are rules 754 and 2191. Here are the relevant
portions of those rules:
{{{
(1) A difference in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the use of
a synonym or abbreviation in place of a word or phrase, is
inconsequential in all forms of communication, as long as
the difference does not create an ambiguity in meaning.
(4) Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule
by default has its ordinary-language meaning.
A pledge is a contract identifying itself as such. A pledge
requires at least one party.
}}}
First, I rule that rot13 is not "ordinary language"; although it is
reasonably common on the Internet, it is used for the precise purpose of
making things harder to read without some effort (often to hide
spoilers, for instance). Also, writing something in rot13 is not really
a difference in spelling, grammar, or dialect.
However, it seems likely that rot13 can be described as "the use of a
synonym or abbreviation", and in this context it does not create an
ambiguity in meaning, especially because in the same message the
pledge's author stated that it was rot13 and gave instructions for
decoding it (thus effectively defining a local synonym). Therefore, rule
754 would seem to encourage TRUE.
Also, rule 2191 states "identifying itself as such", not "clearly" or
"unambiguously" identifying. (I exploited this particular loophole to
win the game a few weeks ago, and the rule has not been changed since
despite my efforts to patch it.) The contract clearly does identify
itself as a pledge, as do the words in question (as Ivan Hope CXXVII has
stated that they do and explained how), so rule 2191 also encourages
TRUE.
As there seem to be no reasonable arguments for FALSE, I therefore judge
TRUE.
--
ais523
