On 05/17/11 13:51, Ed Murphy wrote:
Wooble wrote:
If and only if Agora was Satisfied with my intent to register with
Agoran Consent, I do so.
(I count 3 supporters and 3 objectors, but Murphy's count was 4 and 1.
I think eir count is almost certainly wrong because ais523 and ehird
both unambiguously objected (granted, ais523 *also* unambiguously
supported, but I see nothing in the rules to make either negate the
other), but that doesn't mean mine is correct.)
Obligatory CFJ, disqualifying Wooble: Agora is Satisfied with
Wooble's recent intent to register with Agoran Consent.
Evidence: To the best of my knowledge, here are all announcements
that might have counted as support and/or objection to the intent:
Roujo> I support or vote FOR, whichever is applicable.
ais523> I object. I support.
omd> I support.
scshunt> [replying to ais523] I object to both of these.
ehird> I vote AGAINST.
G.> [replying to ais523] I favor this.
Roujo> [replying to G.] I object.
Tanner> I favor this intent.
Roujo> I support and do so.
ehird> I [something, see upcoming CFJ]
Arguments: Here are all the questions of interpretation that I see:
1) Does support implicitly withdraw one's earlier objection?
2) When replying to two levels of quoted material without explicitly
specifying a target, is either level implicitly specified?
3) Do similar positive/negative phrases (e.g. FOR / AGAINST, favor /
disfavor) count as implicit support / objection?
Gratuitous: I was objecting to ais523's support and objection, not
Wooble's intent.
-scshunt
