On 6/17/25 5:21 PM, Mischief via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/17/25 12:25 PM, Trigon via agora-business wrote:
Gratuitous for TRUE:
From rule 2651/1, "A player CAN initiate an election for a specified
elected office... [w]ith 2 support... provided that the initiator
becomes a candidate in the same message."
Admittedly, there is some ambiguity here, but I argue that there is
one most sensible reading of this rule due to the way it is worded.
The tabled intent includes only initiating an election for an office.
Becoming a candidate is a separate action that must be taken in the
same message as an additional condition for completion of the tabled
intent. In this way, the identity of the "initiator" is not embedded
into the intent, it is determined at the time the tabled action
completes.
That's a reasonable reading. I wonder, though, if that makes the
original tabled intent invalid. An intent to do (X and Y) is not
equivalent to an intent to do X. There are possible readings to make it
okay in this case -- it is necessary to perform Y in conjunction with X
for this method. Also, eir original wording could be construed as
something like (an intent to do X) and then do Y
That should give the judge something to ponder
Given the ambiguous situation, I lay out the following plan. If this CFJ
is TRUE, then I am the Promotor as the four-day nomination period lapsed
with no other candidates about fourteen hours ago. If it is FALSE, I can
still publish the report via deputisation. If a judgement is delivered
before the end of the week, then I will respect the outcome of the
judgement. If not, I will conditionally deputise as the Promotor,
converging the gamestate enough that we at least have a distribution
this week.
--
Trigon
Popular Polygon and Potential Promotor
