On 7/16/20 5:27 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
> The below CFJ is 3867. I assign it to Jason.
>
> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3867
>
> =============================== CFJ 3867 ===============================
>
> In the above message, I broke a pledge.
>
> ==========================================================================
I assign the following judgment in CFJ 3867:
{
It is not disputed that ATMunn made the pledge and sent a message
containing "tacos" to the discussion forum.
First, we must determine whether this action violated the text of the
pledge. To "say" something is not defined in the rules, so it takes on
its natural language meaning. I don't believe that many English speakers
would bat an eye at it being said that someone "said" something in an
email e sent.
If Alice sent Bob an email containing "I will pay you 10 dollars if you
water my plants", and Bob went on to water Alice's plants and attempted
to collect the 10 dollars, most people would be confused if Alice said
"Oh, but I never /said/ I would pay you 10 dollars". Bob would
rightfully respond with "But it's right here in this email you sent
me!". If Alice then went on to say "But I never used my vocal cords to
vibrate air in such a way to create sound that is interpreted as words
that mean I would pay you 10 dollars.", then most people would
rightfully think Alice was crazy (or, perhaps, an Agoran). The important
part of the meaning of "say" is not the part where the words come out of
someone's lips, but the part where the words are communicated.
Since by a natural language reading ATMunn "said" the word "tacos" to
the discussion forum, and since eir pledge stated that e would not do
so, e violated that pledge. E raises the point that eir actions may not
violate the pledge because the violating message was sent to the
discussion forum. I find that this is not the case - e went out of eir
way to phrase the pledge with as broad a scope as possible (writing "in
any context"), and the fact that a message was sent to a discussion
forum does not mean that it was not a message.
Judged TRUE.
Falsifian, in eir gratuitous arguments, stated that Rule 2125 may
prevent ATMunn's actions from being a violation if sending a message to
a discussion forum is not a regulated action. I do not rule on that here
- this case merely asks me to decide whether the pledge was broken, not
whether the action constituted a violation of the rules. As such, there
is no Rule 2125 issue, and the pledge was broken based solely on its
content.
}
--
Jason Cobb
