On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:09 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business
<agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> While I'm busy harassing the Arbitor...
>
> I CFJ: "On or about 16 May 2020, CFJ 3835 became G."
>
>
> I CFJ: "CFJ 3835 is G."
>
> Arguments:
>
I just want to present a few precedents for consideration here:
CFJ 2840
{
Names for rule-defined entities are generally unique (meaning that
each entity has at most one name, not that two entities can't have the
same name, by the way: I don't see any restriction on a Team changing
its name to be the same as another's), but game custom and common
sense support non-uniqueness for other entities' names.
Otherwise, suppose a player "Foo" announces that e is changing eir
name to "Bar". "Bar" immediately becomes a valid referent for em, if
nobody else has been called that recently, but initially eir name
remains "Foo", because the relevant recordkeepors haven't updated
their records yet, and other players who haven't noticed the name
change will still refer to em as "Foo". "Bar" is just a nickname. At
some later time, eir name will become "Bar", and "Foo" will become
just a nickname. This will probably happen soon, as Agorans are quick
to recognize name changes, but the exact time of the change is
indeterminate! If a rule (legitimately) referring to Foo is enacted
in the meantime, even if the intent is completely clear, whether the
reference succeeds depends on this indeterminate time.
}
This shows that selecting a non-unique name would be permissible, but
also that we can continue to refer to the CFJ3835 as G.
CFJ 2460
{
It is POSSIBLE for a player to register with a nickname that was
used by a now-deregistered former player.
}
{
TRUE; it is merely probably illegal due to the high possibility of
confusion. This gets less and less likely as the old player's time
gets older.
}
This implies that it would have been illegal to select a nickname that
caused confusion, such as using the name of another entity or
characteristic of the form of another entity. In this way, I would
argue that G. referring to emself as CFJ 40000 would also be ILLEGAL
in that context. While the repeal of R2170 means that this would no
longer be ILLEGAL, I think these tests may still be applicable as part
of the game custom when interpreting how names function.
CFJ 1361
{
It is my view that, for the purposes of R559, a nickname is a name that
a Player chooses for emself, that can be reliably used to pick em out in
the full range of Agoran contexts. On this view, arbitrary designations
by other Players, while they make succeed in referring to another
Player, do not consitute nicknames of those Players.
}
By this standard, CFJ 2825 would be an invalid nickname because it can
not be reliably used to pick em out in the full range of Agoran
contexts.
