On 6/22/2022 3:30 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/22/22 17:25, nix via agora-business wrote:
>> On 6/22/22 17:22, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 6/20/22 17:41, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 6/20/22 17:40, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 6/19/22 18:51, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>>>
>>> Rule 2621/9 (Power=1.0)
>>> VP Wins
>>>
>>> If a player has at least 20 more Winsomes than each other
>>> player,
>>> e CAN Take Over the Economy by announcement, provided no person
>>> has won the game by doing so in the past 30 days.
>> I agree to the following contract: "Winsome More":
>> 1. G. is the only party to this contract, and can amend or
>> terminate
>> it by announcement.
>> 2. Winsomes are a currency tracked by G. in eir monthly report.
>> 3. G. CAN create, destroy, or transfer Winsomes by announcement.
>>
>>
>> I create 21 Winsomes in my possession.
>>
>> Winsome Report: I have 21, nobody else has any.
>>
>> Comment:
>>
>> There's a bit of ambiguity in these two paragraphs in Rule 1586:
>> A rule, contract, or regulation that refers to an entity by name
>> refers to the entity that had that name when the rule first came
>> to include that reference, even if the entity's name has since
>> changed.
>>
>> If the entity that defines another entity is amended such that it
>> no longer defines the second entity, then the second entity and
>> its attributes cease to exist.
>>
>> Winsomes are no longer "defined" by the rules but they rules do "refer"
>> to
>> Winsomes. If Winsomes have ceased to exist as per the second paragraph,
>> they are no longer entities, and the "reference" bit may or may not apply
>> to *former* entities. "Even if the entity's name has since changed" is
>> very different than "even if the entity no longer exists", and if rules
>> referred to no-longer-existing entities then we'd have to go back a long
>> way into the rules to find terms that were repealed and brought back...
>>
>> -G.
>>
> The above is CFJ 3969.
>
> I assign CFJ 3969 to ais523.
>
Sorry, subject line was wrong.
This message contains no game actions.
>>>
>>> Okay apparently I'm an idiot and the message never actually called a
>>> CFJ, so the assignment failed and ais523 has nothing to judge.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jason Cobb
>>>
>>> Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
>>>
>>
>> CFJ: CFJ 3936 does exist, is the entire contents of the message from G.
>> quoted above, was created by Jason, and was assigned to ais523 successfully.
>>
>> Arguments: We let people create CFJs by simply calling text a CFJ pretty
>> regularly. Jason called it a CFJ and assigned it. Looks like a CFJ to me.
>>
>> --
>> nix
>> Herald, Registrar, Collector
>>
>
> I withdraw the CFJ I created above. I CFJ: CFJ 3969 does exist, is the
> entire contents of the message from G. quoted above, was created by
> Jason, and was assigned to ais523 successfully.
>
> --
> nix
> Herald, Registrar, Collector
>
Gratuitous: Using the typical Arbitor assignment-format language for
assigning (but not calling) a cfj does not "set forth intent" to call a
cfj to the clear-and-unambiguous standard for by-announcement actions
(R478/40).
