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