On Thu, 7 Feb 2019, Aris Merchant wrote:
Gaelan tried to win by Apathy, using one buried intent to satisfy R1728(2) and then another open intent to satisfy R1728(1). This relies on the assumption that the R1728(1) and R1728(2) intents can be separate from each other. However, this is not the case. While R1728(1) specifies merely (and somewhat ungrammatically) that the initiator must have "announced intent", R1728(2) discusses requirements for "the intent". The use of the definite article in R1728(2) means that the intent used to satisfy it must be the same one previously mentioned, i.e. the same one used to satisfy R1728(1). Thus, Gaelan cannot use one intent to satisfy R1728(1) and a different intent to satisfy R1728(2).
The obvious counterargument is that there was only one intent, just two announcements of it.
Greetings, Ørjan.
