G. wrote:
I temporarily deputize for the Arbitor to assign the following CFJs,
hereby numbered 3935 and 3936, to Murphy.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 14:30:54 -0700
Caller: G.
I call the following two linked CFJs, barring nix:
1. Evantine holds the patent title Fugitive.
2. R. Lee is a Fugitive.
CALLER'S ARGUMENTS
Proposal 8617, which took effect recently, reads as follows:
ID: 8617
Title: Forgiveness
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: nix
Co-authors: G.
Agora formally forgives all fugitives listed on the most recent scroll
of Agora.
But there are 3 senses that the word "fugitive" has meaning in Agora.
1. Proposal 4867 (adopted August 2006) awarded a group of people the
patent title Fugitive[1]. Evantine is an example of that [2].
2. People were "unofficially" added to the list in the Herald's scroll
when they deregistered while under some kind of penalty, after the above
set of patent titles was awarded. However, on the scroll, the distinction
between "patent title holder" and "unofficial added person" was lost over
time. Quazie is an example of that.
3. Rule 2555/10 currently defines "fugitive" as someone with one or more
blots who is deregistered. At the time that Proposal 8617 was adopted, R.
Lee was an example of that.
I'm assuming the "unofficial" additions to the fugitive list in the scroll
like Quazie are at the discretion of the Herald to remove.
For the first CFJ (on Evantine), Rule 649/44 secures Patent Titles as
Power 1, so if Proposal 8617 had used language to explicitly revoke the
fugitive patent title from all holders of the title, it would have
succeeded. So the question (on Evantine) is whether "formally forgives
all fugitives listed on the most recent scroll of Agora" is a reasonable
synonym for revoking the patent title Fugitive, especially when there's a
different explicit definition of fugitive in the rules.
A possible complication - when the scroll was ratified in October 2019[3],
the scroll explicitly said that fugitive was an "unofficial designation".
This was likely incorrect immediately before ratification (some of them
were patent titles), but did that ratify those away because they were
explicitly ratified to be "unofficial" and therefore not patent titles?
For the second CFJ (R. Lee), e was an explicitly rules-defined 2-Blot
holding fugitive at the time Proposal 8617 was adopted, e was literally
"listed on the most recent scroll of Agora" as a Champion, Badge-holder,
etc., and "formal forgiveness" in the current ruleset is the expungement
of blots, and that fits the common language definition of forgiving a
punishment. Did this expunge eir blots, causing em to cease being a fugitive?
CALLER'S EVIDENCE
[1] Excerpt from adoption message
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2006-August/002692.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend Rule 1505 (Standard Classes of Crimes and Infractions) to be
called "Dishonor Rolls" and amend it to read:
When the Herald is ordered to place someone in the Chokey, e
shall publically award em the patent title "In the Chokey".
This title shall be automatically revoked after a length of time
indicated by the sentencing order, and the Herald shall announce
the revokation. If a sentencing order is executed against a
defendant who already holds this title, the length of time of
the new sentencing order shall be added to the time left on any
previous ones.
A person is considered to be In Disgrace while in the Chokey,
between the execution and satisfaction of any sentencing orders
binding em, or if deregistered for lawlessness. A person who
leaves the game in disgrace shall be awarded the Patent Title
Fugitive by the Herald. A Player may revoke the title Fugitive
from emself as long as e is no longer in Disgrace. A non-player
may have this title revoked by Agoran Consent.
The rules may further specify actions prohibited to persons in
particular types of disgrace.
The Herald is encouraged to publish lists of those in disgrace
separate from patent titles of honor, to indicate the disgrace.
When this Proposal takes effect, all persons who were fugitives when
this proposal was adopted are hereby awarded the patent title
Fugitive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[2]
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1591
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1592
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1593
[3]
Ratification message:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-October/041613.html
Referring to this scroll:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2019-September/013164.html
I interpret this situation as follows:
* "Fugitive" should be interpreted according to the current rules. Had
the proposal said "persons listed as fugitives", then a broader
interpretation would be appropriate.
* "Forgive", which doesn't appear in the rules, should nevertheless be
interpreted according to the current rules about the relevant
context (fugitives), thus as a synonym for expunging blots, but not
for removing Patent Titles or anything else.
* "Listed" should be interpreted literally, not inferring that they
must be listed /as/ fugitives.
Thus, the effect of adopting Proposal 8617 was to expunge the blots of
R. Lee (the only fugitive under the current definition of that term),
causing em to cease to meet that definition.
3935 (Evantine holds the patent title Fugitive): TRUE.
(I award myself Blue glitter for judging CFJ 3935.)
(I award myself 7 boatloads of coins = 217 coins.)
3936 (R. Lee is a Fugitive): FALSE.
(I award myself Blue glitter for judging CFJ 3936.)
(I award myself another 7 boatloads of coins = 217 coins.)
