On Jul 29, 2011, at 1:19 AM, Arkady English wrote: > On 28 July 2011 14:41, Geoffrey Spear <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is a public message, and I believe that I'm sending it to all >> current players of Agora even if I'm not sending it via a public >> forum. >> >> I probably intend to become a player at this time, unless I'm already >> a player, in which case I merely intend to remain a player. >> >> Any ambiguities in this message are purely coincidental. >> > > I call a CFJ on the statement "The player with the e-mail address > '[email protected]' (Wooble) is a player." > > The second paragraph of Wooble's statement indicates e "probably > intend[s] to become a player". The following clause begins "unless I'm > already a player..." Wooble is not already a player therefore we can > ignore that second half, and Wooble *probably* intends to become a > player. > > The use of the term "probably" in this context is used to convey > doubt, e.g. compare "Your new baby is a boy" with "Your new baby is > probably a boy." In the latter case you'd insist the doctor checked > more closely. > > I therefore argue that we cannot take Wooble's registration unless e > can express less ambigiously whether or not e wants to become a > player. > > FALSE.
Gratuitous: Perhaps. However, it is worth examining what is actually in question in this case. As has been noted in CFJs during certain other periods of the game, registration rules are kept deliberately loose. The ruleset demands "reasonable" (a) clarity and (b) unambiguity of intent to become a player. "Probably," in the mathematical sense, implies a strictly greater than 50% likelihood. The intent is not unclear: it is not as if from his message we are uncertain whether he wants to become a player or eat sushi, for instance. So we are left with unambiguity. Clearly, the intent is ambiguous. Thus the question is of "reasonable unambiguity;" I argue that because the qualifier "probably" is sufficiently strong, this condition is satisfied. A naive look at the precedent this will set may have a doom-and-gloom outlook, since it seems to imply that it allows a high degree of leniency in intent; but as I mentioned above, registration laws are intended to be extraordinarily flexible, and I believe their interpretation of intent should be equally so. [ -Turiski ]
