On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:20, Aaron Goldfein <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 22:46, Ed Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: > > Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2833 > > > > =================== CFJ 2833 (Interest Index = 0) ==================== > > > > If I publish a message stating "I vote FOR on all Agoran > > Decisions in their voting period" but do not further reference > > any particular group of decisions, I have "clearly identified" > > the matter to be decided for all Decisions in their voting > > period, for the purposes of R683(b). > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller: G. > > Barred: omd > > > > Judge: Yally > > Judgement: > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > History: > > > > Called by G.: 13 Aug 2010 23:13:12 GMT > > Assigned to Yally: (as of this message) > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller's Arguments: > > > > 1. Can you "clearly identify" something by a blanket specification, > without > > specifically referencing the fact that you are aware that the something > > exists? > > > > 2. If so, can you identify something without acknowledging that it > exists? > > > > A note that, if the voting sentences in the CFJ statements are taken to > be > > conditionals (conditional on decisions existing, R2127 seems to restrict > > itself to conditional specification of option selected, but is silent on > > conditional specification of matter to be decided. Taken with R2280 on > > implicit votes, it implies that permission to be general or conditional > has > > to be found in the rules for each separate part of the voting > specification > > of R683. > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller's Evidence: > > > > Rule 683/15 (Power=3) > > Voting on Agoran Decisions > > > > An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a > > ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice > > indicating which one of the available options e selects. To be > > valid, the ballot must satisfy the following conditions: > > > > (a) The ballot is submitted during the voting period for the > > decision, and the submitter is an eligible voter at the > > time of submission. > > > > (b) The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided. > > > > (c) The ballot clearly identifies the option selected by the > > voter. > > > > (d) The voter has not publicly retracted the ballot during the > > voting period. ("Changing" a vote is equivalent to > > retracting it and casting a vote with the new value.) > > > > Among the otherwise-valid votes on an Agoran decision, only the > > first N submitted by each entity are valid, where N is the > > entity's voting limit on that decision. The voting limit of an > > entity that is not an eligible voter on an Agoran decision is > > zero. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an Agoran > > decision is one, except where rules say otherwise. > > > > The strength of an option is the number of valid ballots > > selecting that option. > > > > Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of > > ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would > > loosen the constraints specified by this rule. > > > > Rule 2127/6 (Power=1) > > Conditional Votes > > > > If a vote on an Agoran decision is submitted conditionally (e.g. > > "FOR if <X> is true, otherwise AGAINST"), then the selected > > option is evaluated based on the value of the condition(s) at > > the end of the voting period, and is clearly specified if and > > only if the value of the condition(s) can be reasonably > > determined (without circularity or paradox) from information > > reasonably available during the voting period. If the option > > cannot be clearly identified, a vote of PRESENT is cast. > > > > Casting a vote endorsing another voter is equivalent to > > conditionally casting a vote whose value is the same as the most > > common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that > > decision. > > > > Casting a vote denouncing another voter is equivalent to > > conditionally casting a vote whose value is opposite to the most > > common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that > > decision. FOR and AGAINST are opposites. > > > > Rule 2280/0 (Power=3) > > Implicit Votes > > > > When an eligible voter on an Agoran decision attempts to cast > > ballots without explicitly specifying the number of ballots to > > be cast (e.g. "FOR" instead of "FOR*1" or "FOR*3"), e casts a > > number of ballots equal to eir voting limit on that decision. > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2834 > > > > =================== CFJ 2834 (Interest Index = 0) ==================== > > > > If I publish a message stating "I vote FOR on all Agoran > > Decisions in their voting period" but do not further reference > > any particular group of decisions, I have legally acknowledged > > the existence of all Decisions in their voting period. > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller: G. > > Barred: omd > > > > Judge: Yally > > Judgement: > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > History: > > > > Called by G.: 13 Aug 2010 23:13:12 GMT > > Assigned to Yally: (as of this message) > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller's Arguments: > > > > 1. Can you "clearly identify" something by a blanket specification, > without > > specifically referencing the fact that you are aware that the something > > exists? > > > > 2. If so, can you identify something without acknowledging that it > exists? > > > > A note that, if the voting sentences in the CFJ statements are taken to > be > > conditionals (conditional on decisions existing, R2127 seems to restrict > > itself to conditional specification of option selected, but is silent on > > conditional specification of matter to be decided. Taken with R2280 on > > implicit votes, it implies that permission to be general or conditional > has > > to be found in the rules for each separate part of the voting > specification > > of R683. > > > > ======================================================================== > > > > Caller's Evidence: > > > > Rule 683/15 (Power=3) > > Voting on Agoran Decisions > > > > An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a > > ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice > > indicating which one of the available options e selects. To be > > valid, the ballot must satisfy the following conditions: > > > > (a) The ballot is submitted during the voting period for the > > decision, and the submitter is an eligible voter at the > > time of submission. > > > > (b) The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided. > > > > (c) The ballot clearly identifies the option selected by the > > voter. > > > > (d) The voter has not publicly retracted the ballot during the > > voting period. ("Changing" a vote is equivalent to > > retracting it and casting a vote with the new value.) > > > > Among the otherwise-valid votes on an Agoran decision, only the > > first N submitted by each entity are valid, where N is the > > entity's voting limit on that decision. The voting limit of an > > entity that is not an eligible voter on an Agoran decision is > > zero. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an Agoran > > decision is one, except where rules say otherwise. > > > > The strength of an option is the number of valid ballots > > selecting that option. > > > > Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of > > ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would > > loosen the constraints specified by this rule. > > > > Rule 2127/6 (Power=1) > > Conditional Votes > > > > If a vote on an Agoran decision is submitted conditionally (e.g. > > "FOR if <X> is true, otherwise AGAINST"), then the selected > > option is evaluated based on the value of the condition(s) at > > the end of the voting period, and is clearly specified if and > > only if the value of the condition(s) can be reasonably > > determined (without circularity or paradox) from information > > reasonably available during the voting period. If the option > > cannot be clearly identified, a vote of PRESENT is cast. > > > > Casting a vote endorsing another voter is equivalent to > > conditionally casting a vote whose value is the same as the most > > common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that > > decision. > > > > Casting a vote denouncing another voter is equivalent to > > conditionally casting a vote whose value is opposite to the most > > common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that > > decision. FOR and AGAINST are opposites. > > > > Rule 2280/0 (Power=3) > > Implicit Votes > > > > When an eligible voter on an Agoran decision attempts to cast > > ballots without explicitly specifying the number of ballots to > > be cast (e.g. "FOR" instead of "FOR*1" or "FOR*3"), e casts a > > number of ballots equal to eir voting limit on that decision. > > > > ======================================================================== > > I set the II of these cases to 1. > > Arguments for CFJ 2833: > > Because the rules do not define what clearly identifying a decision > means, it seems logical to me to take the common sense, literal > definition of that phrase to infer that "clearly identifying" in this > case means to explicitly say which decisions are under the > identification and which are not. Because there is always a definite > set of Agoran decisions in their voting period, and often times the > vote FOR is a valid option, this is successful. I therefore judge this > case to be TRUE. The rule is obviously trying to prevent against such > behavior as "I vote FOR the best Agoran decision currently in its > voting period," because that type of statement is ambiguous. > > I award myself a capacitor for judging this case. > > I recuse myself as judge from CFJ 2833, because I just don't really > know how to deal with it. > Oops. I recuse myself from CFJ 2834. The II should increase.
