OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3513 assigned to nichdel

[Alex Smith]

On Mon, 2017-05-22 at 12:57 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 
> Oops, forgot something...  I withdraw my most recent CFJ.
> 
> 
> I CFJ on:  In a message dated Mon, 22 May 2017 15:31:30 -0400,
>  Publius Scribonius Scholasticus initiated an Agoran
> Decision.

I think I missed this earlier?
Assuming I haven't already numbered it, this is CFJ 3513 and I assign
it to nichdel.

> I Bar Publius Scribonius Scholasticus.  [this is the only difference]
> 
> 
> Caller's Arguments:
> 
> Given my recent attempt to "announce" OscarMeyr, I wonder if "announced non-
> players" is ambiguous?  In past, listing "all members of set S" without
> specifying the individual set members has been seen as ambiguous, IF it 
> is beyond a reasonable effort of an average player to dig back and find that
> list (as opposed to the officer doing it, as it's eir job) or IF there's
> some uncertainty on membership (e.g. OscarMeyr).
> 
> For players, there's a handy Registrar's report to refer to, so it's not
> beyond a reasonable effort for average players to find that.  For non-
> players, not so much (and if the rules are silent here, consider there
> is an "unfair" burden on non-players who are not clearly listed for
> informed voting - especially listing it as "Ørjan and others"!).
> 
> It is also unclear if the election is limited to "announced" non-players,
> given R2482:  "non-player persons can also become valid options during the
> voting period by announcement."  If this clause is non-functional due to
> conflicts with R107, it would be good to identify the problem and correct
> R2482.  If the clause is *not* non-functional, then the announcement
> limiting options to "announced" players is simply incorrect and therefore
> invalid.
> 
> Caller's Evidence:
> (Message in question)
> On Mon, 22 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > True, the CoE having been successful, I hereby initiate a Victory Election
> > with all players, announced non-players, and PRESENT as valid options and
> > the Herald as the vote collector. I would be in favor of all watchers
> > (Ørjan and others) and G. putting emselves into the race. The ballots
> > should be cast in an instant runoff format.

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3512 assigned to Sprocklem

[Alex Smith]

On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 01:05 +, Quazie wrote:
> I CFJ on the statement: I paid Gaelan 1 Shiney via QPS.

This is CFJ 3512. I assign it to Sprocklem.

> Arguments:
> 1 - QPS isn't a valid agency, as it contains 4 non-conjunction words.
> (Will
> is a verb, not a conjunction)
> 2 - Agencies allow people to be acted on behalf of, not acted as
> (though
> I'm unsure if there's a valid distinction there)
> 
> Evidence:
> QPS's Supposed Text:
> {{{
>   Quazie will Pay the Shinies (QPS)
>   Head: Quazie
>   Agents: All Players
>   Powers:
> If Quazie makes a pledge in which e pledges 1 Shiny in return for
> an
> action or statement, the first player to fulfil the
> action/statement
> in the pledge can transfer a Shiny from Quazie to emself.
> }}}
> 
> Agencies Rule text (in part):
> {{{
>   Rule 2467/1 (Power=1)
>   Agencies
> 
> An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf
> of
> another player. A player may establish an Agency With 24
> hours
> Notice and thereby become its Director by specifying the
> properties of the new Agency:
>   a) A title, which must be exactly three words, not
>  counting conjunctions, articles or prepositions.
> }}}
> Text of the pledge in question:
> {{{
>  I pledge to pay Gaelan 1 shiny in thanks for not creating ~25^3 if
> he uses
> the powers within the QPS agency to pay emself said shiny.
> }}}
> 
> Text of the supposed payment of a shiny
> {{{
>   On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 20:25 Gaelan Steele 
> wrote:
>   I act as Quazie via QPS to pay myself one shiny.
> }}}
> 
> ---END CFJ---
> I retract my pledge quoted above as evidence.
> 
> I pledge that if I didn't pay Gaelan 1 Shiny via QPS, that when the
> above
> CFJ resolves I will pay em 1 Shiny.
> 
> I CoE on the latest Secretary report that now contains the payment in
> question, as it's not in question.

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

OFF: CFJ 3511 assigned to Gaelan

[Alex Smith]

On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 20:51 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> I CFJ on the following statement:
> 
>   Posting a message on a public forum is itself an action, for
> the purposes of rule 2467.

This is CFJ 3511. I assign it to Gaelan.

> Caller’s evidence:
> 
> > Rule 2467/1 (Agencies)
> > 
> > An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf of
> > another player. A player may establish an Agency With 24 hours
> > Notice and thereby become its Director by specifying the properties
> > of the new Agency:
> > 
> > 1. A title, which must be exactly three words, not counting
> > conjunctions, articles or prepositions.
> > 2. A non-empty list of persons other than the Head (the Agents).
> > 3. A description of a set of actions (the Powers).
> > 
> > An Agency's Head may amend its properties or revoke it with 24
> > hours Notice. For greater certainty, an announced intent to create
> > an Agency or amend an Agency's powers is INEFFECTIVE unless it
> > explicitly specifies the new values of the properties being created
> > or amended.
> > 
> > The Powers of an Agency must be stated as actions, although they
> > may may be conditional on date, time, game state, or other
> > preconditions. If condition(s) are specified as necessary for a
> > power to be used, it is limited; otherwise, it is unlimited. If it
> > attempts to specify a power in a manner that is unclear, ambiguous,
> > circular, inconsistent, paradoxical, or that depends on information
> > that is impossible or unreasonably difficult to determine, then the
> > specification of that power is invalid, and it CANNOT be used.
> > 
> > An Agency, once created, SHOULD be referred to by the acronym
> > formed from its title with conjunctions, articles, and prepositions
> > removed. The acronym of an agency must be unique and any attempt to
> > create or amend an Agency such that two Agencies would have the
> > same acronym is INEFFECTIVE.
> > 
> > The Agents of an Agency may perform the Actions described in the
> > Powers of the Agency on behalf of the Agency's Head.
> 
> 
> Incidentally, the Github Pages rendition of the rules incorrectly
> links “power” in this rule to the definition in r. 1688.
> 
> -o

-- 
ais523

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3510 assigned to Quazie

[Alex Smith]

On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 20:09 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> I CFJ on the following statement, barring Publius Scribonius
> Scholasticus:
> 
>   In the last seven days, I conditionally paid Publius Scribonius
> Scholasticus 20 shinies on three separate occasions.

This is CFJ 3510. I assign it to Quazie.

> Caller’s evidence quoted below.
> 
> Exhibit A:
> 
> > On May 22, 2017, at 12:08 AM, Owen Jacobson 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > TTttPF.
> > 
> > -o
> > 
> > > On May 22, 2017, at 12:08 AM, Owen Jacobson  > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On May 20, 2017, at 11:06 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus  > > scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com  > > asti...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I judge CFJ 3469 DISMISS because of the typo.
> > > 
> > > In final and complete satisfaction of my pledge, if I inherited
> > > G.’s Shinies, I pay Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 20 shinies
> > > for rendering judgement on one of the listed CFJs while it
> > > remained unjudged.
> > > 
> > > Well done to our judges Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, nichdel,
> > > and Gaelan. Your service is much appreciated.
> > > 
> > > -o
> 
> Exhibit B:
> 
> > On May 23, 2017, at 7:59 PM, Owen Jacobson 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > TTttPF.
> > 
> > > On May 22, 2017, at 12:08 AM, Owen Jacobson  > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On May 20, 2017, at 11:06 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus  > > scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com  > > asti...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I judge CFJ 3469 DISMISS because of the typo.
> > > 
> > > In final and complete satisfaction of my pledge, if I inherited
> > > G.’s Shinies, I pay Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 20 shinies
> > > for rendering judgement on one of the listed CFJs while it
> > > remained unjudged.
> > > 
> > > Well done to our judges Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, nichdel,
> > > and Gaelan. Your service is much appreciated.
> > > 
> > > -o
> 
> Exhibit C:
> 
> > On May 22, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Owen Jacobson 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On May 20, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus  > > scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com  > > asti...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I find CFJ 3468 to be trivially TRUE
> > 
> > In partial satisfaction of my pledge, if I inherited G.’s Shinies,
> > I pay Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 20 shinies for rendering
> > judgement on one of the listed CFJs while it remained unjudged.

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3508, 3509 assigned to CuddleBeam

[Alex Smith]

On Mon, 2017-05-22 at 19:20 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I CFJ on these statements:
> 
> “Any player may take the office of Rulekeepor with 2 support.” [i.e.
> I got a pink slip]
> “o committed a cardable offense in issuing a Pink Slip to Gaelan.” 
> 
> I bar o from both CFJs.

These are CFJ 3508 and CFJ 3509 respectively. I assign them to
CuddleBeam.

> Arguments:
> 
> I don’t believe I committed a crime. o claimed that I committed
> Forgery; there is no crime named “Forgery” in the ruleset, the only
> match in the SLR for “forgery” is the crime of Endorsing Forgery
> (“Ratification Without Objection” 2202/6). There are several problems
> with this:
> There is no crime named Forgery.
> I explicitly noted that the attempt at apathy was separate from the
> report, therefore (assuming that worked) it was not within a ratified
> document.
> Reports are self-ratified, not ratified without objection.
> Therefore, there is no evidence that I broke the rules. Even so, a
> Pink Slip is not appropriate. 2476/0 “Pink Slips” states that a pink
> slip is appropriate "for abuses of official power for personal
> gain.  A Pink Slip CANNOT be issued unless the reason indicates the
> specific office or offices whose power was abused.” The ability to
> send long messages to a public forum in which one could hide a
> dependent action is not a power granted to the Rulekeepor by the
> rules; it provides an alibi, but that is not a rule-defined power.
> 
> I believe it is very clear that the issuance of the Pink Slip was
> against the rules. However, the rules regarding Cards is a mishmash
> of CAN NOTs and SHALL NOTs, and I’m not sure if any of the CAN NOTs
> were triggered, hence the two CFJs.
> > On May 22, 2017, at 6:30 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> > 
> > I don’t think the Pink Slip is valid.
> > 
> > Rule 2476/0: "A Pink Slip is a type of Card that is appropriate for
> > abuses of official power for personal gain. A Pink Slip CANNOT be
> > issued unless the reason indicates the specific office or offices
> > whose power was abused.”
> > 
> > The only reason being Rulekeepor aided me in this attempt at
> > victory is that I had an excuse to publish a huge message; the
> > ability to publish huge amounts of text is not a power given to the
> > Rulekeepor by the rules. I could have, for example, hidden the
> > attempt to win by Apathy in a written-out version of my Agency
> > scam. There was no abuse of a specific power exclusive to the
> > Rulekeepor.
> > 
> > Gaelan
> > > On May 21, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Owen Jacobson 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On May 21, 2017, at 1:37 AM, Gaelan Steele 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The following section is not a portion of the report:
> > > > For the purposes of this section, The Sentence is “I intend,
> > > > without objection, to declare [word], specifying myself.”
> > > > I execute The Sentence, substituting [word] for a word
> > > > beginning with “ap” that is a synonym for “not caring.”
> > > 
> > > This appears to be an attempt to abuse the office of Rulekeepor
> > > for personal gain, in the form of initiating a victory by Apathy
> > > for Gaelan while hiding it within the voluminous reports required
> > > of eir office. That the attempt may not succeed does not justify
> > > eir intentions. Accordingly, I issue Gaelan a Pink Slip for abuse
> > > of the office of Rulekeepor for the crime of Forgery.
> > > 
> > > Gaelan: in spite of this censure, you remain Rulekeepor. I leave
> > > it to the discretion of Agora as a whole whether you should hold
> > > that office in light of this serious offence. Within the next
> > > seven days, any player may, with two support, take over an office
> > > which you hold. I stand aside, and will not support usurpation,
> > > but neither will I object. The office of Rulekeepor is essential
> > > to the functioning of Agora as a Nomic, and by abusing your
> > > authority to publish reports and compromising the trust players
> > > place in their content, you have put the integrity of the game at
> > > risk.
> > > 
> > > -o
> > > 

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

[Owen Jacobson]

I claim that the most recent Secretary’s weekly report contains an error: it 
omits a payment between Quazie and Gaelan. I accept this claim and retract the 
report, and publish the following correction in its place.

Secretary's Weekly Report

Date of this report: Sun, 21 May 2017
Date of last report: Sun, 14 May 2017


Recent events (all times UTC)

Mon,  1 May 2017 00:00:00  Payday
Mon,  1 May 2017 07:07:43  o paid 5 Shinies (Organization "AVM")
Mon,  1 May 2017 20:47:10  Agora paid 4 Shinies (P.S.Scholasticus)
Tue,  2 May 2017 00:38:42  Agora paid 6 Shinies (ais523)
Tue,  2 May 2017 02:15:14  Roujo paid 20 Shinies (nichdel)
Tue,  2 May 2017 04:11:07  Organization "AVM" paid 6 Shinies (o)
Tue,  2 May 2017 05:23:56  Agora paid 70 Shinies (Roujo)
Tue,  2 May 2017 23:43:27  Agora paid 220 Shinies (Charles, Sci_Guy12,
Tekneek, Yally, Zachary Watterson)
Wed,  3 May 2017 04:22:28  o amended Organization "AVM"'s charter
Thu,  4 May 2017 00:11:00  G. paid (ais523)
Fri,  5 May 2017 18:34:38  Quazie paid 5 Shinies (Organization "AAaAA")
Fri,  5 May 2017 18:34:38  Publius Scribonius Scholasticus paid
5 Shinies (Organization "AAaAA")
Sat,  6 May 2017 04:23:31  Agora paid 110 Shinies (aranea)
Sat,  6 May 2017 01:00:34  nichdel paid 6 Shinies (o)
Sun,  7 May 2017 08:02:27  Agora paid 5 Shinies (Aris)
Sun,  7 May 2017 21:40:20  Agora paid 5 Shinies (ais523)
- previous report -
Thu, 11 May 2017 20:53:34  Agora paid 10 Shinies (nichdel)
- time of last report -
Mon, 15 May 2017 09:27:29  Gaelan paid 1 Shinies (Quazie)
Mon, 15 May 2017 16:28:54  Agora paid 10 Shinies (ais523)
Tue, 16 May 2017 07:57:15 !o paid 141 Shinies (G.)
Thu, 18 May 2017 21:27:54  grok paid 1 Shinies (Aris)
Sat, 20 May 2017 04:35:06 !Gaelan paid 20 Shinies (o)
Sat, 20 May 2017 04:35:06 !Gaelan paid 20 Shinies (o)
Sat, 20 May 2017 06:16:48 !nichdel paid 20 Shinies (o)
Sat, 20 May 2017 19:59:03  Agora paid 4 Shinies (Quazie)
Sun, 21 May 2017 02:03:05  Agora paid 3 Shinies (ais523)
Sun, 21 May 2017 02:05:52  Agora paid 1 Shinies (grok)
Sun, 21 May 2017 03:25:36  Gaelan paid 1 Shinies (Quazie, via
agent Gaelan of QPS)
Sun, 21 May 2017 23:11:33  Agora paid 4 Shinies (Aris)

Events marked with a ! are provisional, pending one or more CFJs.


Personal Lockouts:

Player Until

Quazie July 18, 2017

Global Lockout: No


Balances:

The following information is provisional, pending one or more CFJs.

 293 Shinies  Agora
   6 Shinies  Organization
   6 ShiniesAVM
 701 Shinies  Player
  49 ShiniesAris
 141 ShiniesG.
   2 ShiniesGaelan
  50 ShiniesHenri
  50 ShiniesMurphy
  31 ShiniesPublius Scribonius Scholasticus
  29 ShiniesQuazie
  30 ShiniesSprocklem
  50 ShiniesWarrigal, the
  50 Shiniesais523
  65 Shiniesnichdel
  54 Shinieso
  50 Shiniesomd
  50 Shinies天火狐


Budgets:

Player AAaAA   ABM  ACU  AVM  蘭亭社 Expenditure
---
ais523  25   30   55
aranea  25   50   75
Murphy   50   50
nichdel   50  50 100
o50   50 100
omd  20   20
Sprocklem   25   20   45
天火狐   5050

Income5075  220  10050   495

ABM = The Agoran Betting Market
ACU = The Agoran Credit Union
AVM = The Agoran Voting Market



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP