DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Thesis Review: 4st's Submission (@4st, Aspen, Janet)

[Aspen via agora-discussion]

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 1:07 PM nix via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> Here is the current list of interested thesis reviewers.
>
> ReviewerLast Reviewed Thesis
> 
> 4st
> Aspen
> Janet
> juan
> nix
>
> If you would like your name added or removed from this list, simply
> notify me.
>
>
> 4st has submitted a thesis, which is below. I assign the following
> people to review it: myself, Janet, Aspen. I request the reviewers give
> their verdicts within 1 week of this notice. If you are unable to do so,
> let me know if you need an extension or would like someone else to be
> assigned instead.


I expect to respond to this within the next 48 hours. I hope to do it soon,
but there's a chance I might not have the energy tonight.

-Aspen

>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (@Distributor/Proposal) Player-Defined Nonsense

[Edward Murphy via agora-discussion]

ais523 wrote:


(Also, nkep feels like it fits into this sort of framework somehow, but
I'm not sure how.)


For those unfamiliar, "nkep" was basically the "I floop" concept
combined with private-agreement shenanigans. A search of the CFJ
archive turns up the following, there were probably some others:

  https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1799

  https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?2626

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement in CFJ 4005, CFJ 4006 [attn. Arbitor]

[Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:25 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business
 wrote:
> The only potentially relevant precedent that I was able to find was CFJ
> 3551, on whether a revision could be a duty-fulfilling report. In eir
> arguments, the caller states in eir arguments that "[a] revision is also
> a report", and H. Judge o held the same. Although the document in
> question was hypothetical and the issue focused on in the judgement was
> whether there was a duty, rather than whether the document was a report,
> this does at least weakly suggest an understanding that a revision was a
> whole report.

Maybe a bit of a refinement from precedent:  CFJ 3658[0] found that
it's (in many cases) IMPOSSIBLE to CoE a "whole report", rather the
scope of the CoE is generally the "whole section" where the error is
contained (e.g. the whole section of the report purporting to be a
list of switches, etc.).  I don't think this changes your main point
(that a partial section with a diff doesn't work) but it may be worth
some wording adjustment that the minimal revision is "whole revised
section of report".

Though culturally, we tend to prefer "whole reports" for revisions
(easier to look up game status), this difference comes into play when
(for example) the Herald has both Karma and Score as separate
formatted messages, but both are part of eir weekly report - I don't
think anyone CoEing the "karma report" expected the Herald to
republish the "score report" as well.

[0] https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3658

-G.