On 2/6/23 22:04, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> I intend, without objection, to declare Apathy, specifying myself.
>
Without objection, I declare Apathy, specifying myself.
[Disclaimer: the above may fail.]
I CFJ: "In this message, Apathy was declared."
Arguments:
{
R2124/31 does not directly ENABLE a player to object to an intent. It
instead ENABLEs a person to "act on eir own behalf, by announcement, to
[...] become an objector" to an intent. Becoming an objector to an
intent is a regulated action, as the rules describe the circumstances
under which it would fail (e.g. if the objector has previously
objected). It therefore requires an explicit method, which does not
appear to be provided. This may suggest that the underlying becoming
cannot be performed.
Notably, R2466 only specifically defines acting on behalf when the agent
and principle are different persons. However, that definition does
require the principal to be authorized to perform the underlying act and
that the method of the underlying act be used. It also makes acting on
behalf a regulated action, thus requiring an explicit method.
Based on the phrasing of R2124, it appears to authorize at most one of
"acting on one's own behalf" and "becoming an objector", while both of
which likely need an explicit method.
Notably, tabling an intent does not suffer from this same potential
problem, as it uses the "acting as emself" phrasing to restrict acting
on behalf. This would result in intents being able to be tabled but not
supported/objected to.
As a counter argument to the above, H. Judge Gaelan found in CFJ 3901
[0] that:
> 2466/2 only gives the phrase "acting on behalf"
> any special meaning when it's on behalf of another person, so "acting on
> one's own behalf" doesn't really have any special meaning or significance.
> By a plain-English reading, acting on one's behalf to do something is just
> doing the thing. So I think this works just fine.
However, the context is slightly different, the rule in question in that
case said that the principal does act on behalf of the agent (who
happens to be emself), rather than providing a method via CAN. I would
also ask the judge to consider this question in full, since CFJ 3901 did
not explicitly consider whether acting on one's own behalf might be
regulated.
}
Evidence:
{
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1728/46 (Power=3)
Tabled Actions
An action is a Tabled Action if the Rules purport to authorize its
performance via one of the following methods:
* With N Support, where N is a positive integer.
* Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer.
* With N Agoran Consent, where N is a positive integer multiple of
0.1.
* With T notice, where T is a time period.
The parameters N and T, if omitted, default to 1 and 4 days,
respectively (e.g. "without objection" means N=1). If a rule
defines N as less than 1, it is instead treated as 1.
A person, acting as emself, CAN by announcement table an intent
(syn. "intend") to perform a tabled action, clearly,
conspicuously, explicitly, and without obfuscation specifying the
action, the method (including non-default parameter values), and,
optionally, conditions.
A person is the sponsor of such an intent if e tabled it, or if e
is authorized to perform its action due to holding a rule-defined
position previously held by the person who tabled it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2124/31 (Power=3)
Performing Tabled Actions
For a given tabled intent, a player CAN, unless otherwise
forbidden by the rules or the document enabling the action, act on
eir own behalf, by announcement, to:
* Become a supporter ("support" it), unless e tabled or previously
supported it;
* Become an objector ("object to" it), unless e previously
objected to it;
* Cease to be a supporter or objector ("withdraw" support/objection).
An intent is ripe if was tabled within the past 14 days, the
Speaker hasn't objected to it in the past 48 hours, and its
conditions, if any, are each clearly and unambiguously met.
An intent is mature if it was tabled at least 4 days ago and
nobody withdrew objections from it in the past 24 hours.
A rule purporting to allow a person to perform a tabled action
allows em to do so by announcement, if, considering only intents
for that action/method combination:
* With N Support: e is a sponsor or supporter of a ripe intent with
at least N supporters.
* Without N Objections: e is a sponsor of a mature ripe intent with
less than N objectors.
* With N Agoran Consent: e is a sponsor or supporter of a mature
ripe intent with supporters greater than N times its objectors
(e SHOULD list supporters and objectors).
* With T notice: e is the sponsor of a ripe intent created at
least T ago.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2466/2 (Power=3)
Acting on Behalf
When a rule allows one person (the agent) to act on behalf of
another (the principal) to perform an action, that agent CAN
perform the action if it is POSSIBLE for the principal to do so,
taking into account any prerequisites for the action. If the
enabling rule does not specify the mechanism by which the agent
may do so, then the agent CAN perform the action in the same
manner in which the principal CAN do so, with the additional
requirement that the agent must, in the message in which the
action is performed, uniquely identify the principal and that the
action is being taken on behalf of that person.
A person SHALL NOT act on behalf of another person if doing so
causes the second person to violate the rules. A person CANNOT act
on behalf of another person to do anything except perform a game
action; in particular, a person CANNOT act on behalf of another
person to send a message, only to perform specific actions that
might be taken within a message, including actions that would
otherwise be taken by publishing certain text.
When an action is performed on behalf of a principal, then the
action is considered for all game purposes to have been performed
by the principal, unless a rule specifically states that it is
treated differently for some purpose, in which case it is treated
as described by that rule.
Allowing a person to act on behalf of another person is secured at
power 2.0. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would
prohibit a person from taking an action, except that it defers to
any rule that imposes limitations specifically on actions taken on
behalf of another person.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2125/13 (Power=3)
Regulated Actions
An action is regulated if: (1) the Rules limit, allow, enable, or
permit its performance; (2) the Rules describe the circumstances
under which the action would succeed or fail; or (3) the action
would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some
player is required to be a recordkeepor.
A Regulated Action CAN only be performed as described by the
Rules, and only using the methods explicitly specified in the
Rules for performing the given action. The Rules SHALL NOT be
interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated actions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0]: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3901
}
--
Janet Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
