On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Alex Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 15:05 -0400, omd wrote: >> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Henri Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I CfJ: The Assessor, scshunt, failed to end the voting period for >> > proposals 7641-7642 in 7 days, thereby violating Rules 107 and 2143. >> > Scshunt has therefore committed the Class-2 Crime of Tardiness. >> > >> > I bar scshunt. > > CFJ: CFJ 3408 is assigned to omd.
Evidence: The caller's judgement in CFJ 2897: On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ed Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm having problems with the CFJ in question. The problem is that game > custom and past CFJs give a strong indication that ehird's attempt > failed; but the rules, to me, give a weak indication that it succeeded, > and they take precedence. (As far as I can tell, subject lines are sent > via the fora along with the rest of the message, and the only thing that > could cause that to /not/ take an action is if it's too ambiguous to > succeed. Hidden email headers are one thing, where there's ambiguity > caused by the fact that people might not see the header in question, but > with a plainly visible header like the subject line, in a situation > where the subject line is clearly deliberately changed to take a message > (e.g. because it's a reply to another message and has been deliberately > edited, like it was in ehird's case), I can't see a rules-based reason > to disallow it. > > Additionally, I don't see why everyone's annoyed with me for not judging > this sooner. For one thing, it's II 0 and thus, by definition, > uninteresting and unimportant. For another thing, CFJ judgements are not > definitive. A judgement in this matter is entirely useless if it turns > out to be incorrect. Sure, I could just say TRUE or FALSE with some > reasonable reasoning (which I did!), but that doesn't mean that the > verdict is necessarily platonically correct. If you want certainty about > the gamestate, I suggest you sort it out pragmatically, via urgent > proposal or ratification or whatever; attempting to deduce the platonic > gamestate in a situation as balanced as this is fraught with danger, due > to the chance of getting the wrong result.
