On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 3:47 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On Sep 7, 2020, at 11:44 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > > > On 9/7/20 6:43 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote: > > >> I intend, with support, to group-file a motion to reconsider CFJ 3882. > Arguments: what G. Filed wasn't a proof of a *claim* of a valid judgement; > it was just a valid judgment. He never proved that he made the claim, which > is plainly what is required by the phrasing. > > > > > > > > > This fails - you need 2 support to group-file, so you haven't met the > > > standard for specifying the method. > > > > > > -- > > > Jason Cobb > > > > > > > Right, bleh, I just caught that. > > > > I intend, with 2 support, to group-file a motion to reconsider CFJ 3882. > Arguments (slightly different, those were also wrong): what G. Filed wasn't > a proof of a *claim* of a valid judgement; it was just a proof of a valid > judgment. He never proved that he made the claim, which is plainly what is > required by the phrasing. I support. I'll actually go the other direction. The contract says "Any player CAN, with notice, file a proof of a claim of a valid judgement." With notice is a mechanism; in the absence of something saying that the claim must be "specified", the only requirements are the requirements for performing an action with notice. Those requirements include the intent and four day waiting period, and the need to specify the action and announce that one is performing it. However, there is no requirement to specify anything more than that. "With notice, I file a proof of a claim of a valid judgement" should work fine. To require more is to ignore the fact that the contract provides a mechanism for performing the action of filing a proof of claim. You're looking at what one might need to do to file a proof of claim in the absence of a definition, and then incorporating those requirements into the definition. You're changing "Any player CAN, with notice, file a proof of a claim of a valid judgement." to "Any player CAN, with notice, file a proof of a claim of a valid judgement, provided e..." If my reasoning is wrong, then Gaelan should be right. Also, sorry, I have a feeling my writing isn't the clearest right now. -Aris
