The below CFJ is 3888. I assign it to nix.
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3888
=============================== CFJ 3888 ===============================
On or about 00:15:33 UTC on 12 Nov 2020, in a message entitled
'[Stonemason] Throwing Stones', Jason made a pledge.
==========================================================================
Caller: Jason
Judge: nix
==========================================================================
History:
Called by Jason: 14 Nov 2020 17:01:47
Assigned to nix: [now]
==========================================================================
[Message in question]
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2020-November/014385.html
Caller's Evidence:
Rule 2450/10 (Power=1.7)
Pledges
If a consenting Player makes a clear public pledge (syn. Oath) to
perform (or refrain from performing) certain actions, then
breaking the pledge is ILLEGAL; doing so is the Class N crime of
Oathbreaking, where N is the value explicitly stated by the
pledge, or 2 if the pledge does not explicitly state a value.
Allowing a pledge to expire without carrying out an action one
pledged to do in it constitutes breaking the pledge.
The time window of a pledge is W days, where W is the value
explicitly stated by the pledge, or 60 if the pledge does not
explicitly state a value. A pledge ceases to exist at the end of
its time window.
If breaking the pledge harms specific other parties, the Referee
SHOULD solicit the opinion of those parties in determining an
appropriate fine.
The Notary CAN destroy a pledge Without Objection, but SHOULD NOT
do so unless the pledge no longer serves any significant purpose.
Caller's Arguments:
Making a pledge is not a by announcement action, and only require the
pledge to be "clear". This means that a player need not clearly and
unambiguously specify the action of making a pledge in order to do so,
and I imagine it was phrased this way to allow enforcement of natural
language promises. In the message referenced in the statement, Jason
initiated an auction with an auction method that purports to place a
"SHALL" requirement on em. Auction method regulations are not given
enforcement power by the rules, and auction methods appear to not be
binding upon the auctioneer. However, it may be the case that the
requirement was "clear" enough for it to constitute a pledge on the
auctioneer publishing them.
==========================================================================
