On Tue, 2024-03-12 at 14:29 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > Or, in the alternative, based on the authority Rule 2125, Rule 2471 > prohibits sending a message with certain attributes, and that is what > the infraction is. So, the infraction isn't contained within the message > in any case. Thus, even if all infractions are judged to be game > actions, whether or not sending the message was an infraction has no > bearing on whether the message *contained* a game action. So, the > message does not contain any game actions and the statement is FALSE.
Something I'm confused about (and which is relevant to me because I need to make a ruling as Referee): I think it's undisputed that rule 2125 allows the rules to prohibit the sending of messages even if doing so is not an action (it says that very explicitly). However, it is less clear whether rule 2471 actually makes use of that permission; it says "A person SHALL NOT make a public statement that is a lie.", and "SHALL NOT" is defined (by rule 2152) as "Performing the described action violates the rule in question." If rule 2471 is therefore read as "It is a violation of this rule to perform the action of making a public statement that is a lie", it therefore matters whether or not the making of the statement is an action, because rule 2471 criminalises only statements that are actions, not statements that are not actions. For what it's worth, I'm currently leaning (based on the above expansion) towards a reading in which rule 2471 defines lying to be an unregulated action that is nonetheless a rules violation (rule 2125 states that the rules cannot proscribe unregulated actions, except for the sending of public messages, so this is not a violation of rule 2125). But I'd be interested in feedback from other players in this respect. -- ais523 Referee
