DIS: Re: BUS: Win by Paradox
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote: Aaron Goldfein wrote: This post is a win announcement. CFJ 2543, as ruled by H. Judge BobTHJ, is a tortoise and has been so continuously for the previous two weeks, but not the previous four weeks. As I was the initiator of this case, I satisfy the Winning Condition of Paradox. To clean up the situation that allowed me to achieve this win, I submit the following proposal: Proposal: No More Paradox (AI = 1, II = 1) Amend point d of Rule 2143 to read: For every non-IADoP report, the date on which it was last submitted. End Proposal I intend, without objection, to make the above proposal distributable. Fails, the CFJ in question is not a tortoise, as it is not an inquiry into the possibility or legality of an action. I CFJ on the following sentence. CFJ 2453 is a tortoise. I bar coppro from judging this case. Arguments: Yes it does; it concerns the legality of submitting an IADoP's report that includes the eir previous report was submitted, not the date eir current report is being submitted. It directly asks if the IADoP's report contains X. There is no other way for the report to contain it other than to legally contain it. -Yally I CFJ on the following sentence. CFJ 2543 is a tortoise. I bar coppro and Yally from judging this case. (Next time, CFJ on the correct statement) -- --Rodlen
DIS: Re: BUS: Win by Paradox
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Rodlenrodlenj...@gmail.com wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: Rodlen rodlenj...@gmail.com Date: Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:44 PM Subject: Re: BUS: Win by Paradox To: agora-discussion@agoranomic.org On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote: Aaron Goldfein wrote: This post is a win announcement. CFJ 2543, as ruled by H. Judge BobTHJ, is a tortoise and has been so continuously for the previous two weeks, but not the previous four weeks. As I was the initiator of this case, I satisfy the Winning Condition of Paradox. To clean up the situation that allowed me to achieve this win, I submit the following proposal: Proposal: No More Paradox (AI = 1, II = 1) Amend point d of Rule 2143 to read: For every non-IADoP report, the date on which it was last submitted. End Proposal I intend, without objection, to make the above proposal distributable. Fails, the CFJ in question is not a tortoise, as it is not an inquiry into the possibility or legality of an action. I CFJ on the following sentence. CFJ 2453 is a tortoise. I bar coppro from judging this case. Arguments: Yes it does; it concerns the legality of submitting an IADoP's report that includes the eir previous report was submitted, not the date eir current report is being submitted. It directly asks if the IADoP's report contains X. There is no other way for the report to contain it other than to legally contain it. -Yally I CFJ on the following sentence. CFJ 2543 is a tortoise. I bar coppro and Yally from judging this case. (Next time, CFJ on the correct statement) -- --Rodlen TTttPF. -- --Rodlen As per rule 591, you can only disqualify one person.
DIS: Re: BUS: Win by Paradox?
comex wrote: On Sunday 13 May 2007 7:09 pm, Ed Murphy wrote: Second-System Effect registers. I call for judgement on the following statement: Second-System Effect registered on or about Sun, 13 May 2007 16:09:28 -0700 Arguments: Without knowledge of the agreement that defines SSE, this action should to any reasonable judge appear equally legal and illegal. Unknown != equal. Without that knowledge, Rule 1565 clause ii) might apply. Alternately, the judge could choose to trust that I wasn't deliberately lying.
