On 5/16/21 2:00 PM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
I call two CFJs, and suggest that they be linked:
CFJ: With the above-quoted message, Trigon revoked 400 Coins from
Falsifian.
CFJ: With the above-quoted message, Trigon created one Victory Card in
Falsifian's possession.
[snip]
Arguments for the second CFJ:
If the first CFJ is TRUE, I see no reason the second shouldn't be
TRUE too. The auction rules make it clear that the auctioneer can
do this if the auction method allows it, and the auction method is
clear.
If the first CFJ is FALSE because the auction regulation can't
empower Trigon to revoke assets, then I think it comes down to the
interpretation of the following sentence from the draft regulation:
In this message, the auctioneer CAN and SHALL destroy the amount
to be paid from the inventory each awardee and transfer to that
player (or create in eir possession if the item is new) the set
of assets associated with the lot e won.
The form is: "the auctioneer CAN and SHALL do A and B". But if
we've established they can't do A, then they can't do A and B.
This is a bit ambiguous. Maybe the sentence has no effect since the
regulation is trying to empower the auctioneer to do something (A
and B together) that they can't. Or maybe it should be read as
authorizing the auctioneer to do A and also B.
However, even under the second interpretation, I still think it
would be FALSE, because R2545 requires the auction method to be
"generally recognizable ... as a fair, equitable, and timely
[method]". Winning just by being the last person to state a bigger
meaningless number than the last person, when a casual reading of
the the regulations wouldn't make it clear that's the goal, doesn't
seem fair.
Gratuitous arguments: the definition of an auction is "a way for
entities to give away specified assets (items), grouped into lots, in
exchange for a currency" (Rule 2545/3 ¶1). My inclination here is to say
that, should the first CFJ about whether a lot was transferred be judged
FALSE, what I have done here fails to meet the criteria to be considered
an auction as it is not a way to exchange currency for lots, implying a
judgement of FALSE.
Arguments for FALSE for the first CFJ:
Note that the auction began before the regulations were amended. This
may affect interpretation of the clause: "For the purposes of
interpreting auction definitions, such methods are treated as if they
are defined in this rule.", which seems to refer specifically to
auction regulations.
Even if we do consider the new regulation text to have been in force, I
still think it should be FALSE. I think the following quotes from the
recent thread "[Treasuror] [Auction Regulations Proto] Rough Draft for
Redesign" summarise my position (I also included Trigon's reply).
Gratuitous arguments: I have picked through the wording of Rule 2545/3
and I have more evidence now than what was quoted, and it lies in Rule
2545/3 ¶2, which I present, somewhat abbreviated.
When the rules authorize a person (the auctioneer) to conduct an
auction, e CAN do so by any wholly public method that ... under
common definitions and terms used in auctions, as a fair,
equitable, and timely means of ... enabling the appropriate
exchange of goods.
This is where I believe my logic falls apart, but I would really like my
auctions to work, so attempt to bear with me.
When the rules authorize a person to conduct an auction, we know by ¶1
that that authorizes em to oversee a means of exchanging currency for
lots. This implies that any method that the auctioneer chooses that
allows an equitable auction process has authorization to facilitate such
a transfer by extension of the authorization to perform the auction at
all. Otherwise it would not be an auction by ¶1.
On the other hand, perhaps similar logic could lead one to conclude that
the rules never authorize any player to begin an auction under auction
regulations that fail to allow a method to transfer or destroy coins
from awardees, in which case what I just have done was never was an
auction in the first place.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2545/3 (Power=2)
Auctions
An auction is a way for entities to give away specified assets
(items), grouped into lots, in exchange for a currency. A lot is a
non-empty list of items to be transferred to a single recipient
(an auction winner).
When the rules authorize a person (the auctioneer) to conduct an
auction, e CAN do so by any wholly public method that would be
generally recognizable, as specified by the auctioneer at the
start of the auction, and under common definitions and terms used
in auctions, as a fair, equitable, and timely means of determining
the auction winners from among the current players, and enabling
the appropriate exchange of goods.
The rule that authorizes the auction further authorizes the
auctioneer or auction winners to transfer said items as necessary
to conduct the auction in a manner consistent with the auction
method. If the authorization is to auction "new" items, it further
authorizes the creation of said items as per the chosen method.
The Treasuror is the promulgator for regulations that define
specific auction methods (i.e. "the default auction method") and
SHOULD do in order to aid trade and commerce. For the purposes of
interpreting auction definitions, such methods are treated as if
they are defined in this rule. To further aid trade and commerce,
auction methods should be interpreted in the name of fairness with
deference to the method's clear intent, if intent can be
reasonably inferred.
--
Trigon
¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST
I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
