> Further, I don't believe "or" is ruleset-defined, so it should have the
> common language meaning, which is exclusive, but I think there is history to
> suggest that ENDORSE or AGAINST means what Tanner intended. (I could be
> completely wrong about this)
Post-research remarks: This is wrong/irrelevant.
The actual word you would use here if you wanted to be totally safe would be
"otherwise," since 2127 actually uses that word in an example:
If a vote on an Agoran decision is submitted conditionally (e.g.
"FOR if <X> is true, otherwise AGAINST"),
But regardless, I'd like to quote the actual text in 2127 in question:
[*continues from above*] then the selected
option is evaluated based on the value of the condition(s) at
the end of the voting period, and is clearly specified if and
only if the value of the condition(s) can be reasonably
determined (without circularity or paradox) from information
reasonably available during the voting period. If the option
cannot be clearly identified, a vote of PRESENT is cast.
I think in this case, the option can be "clearly identified," so it probably is
unambiguous regardless of whether Murphy votes or not.
-Turiski
