The below CFJ is 3832.  I assign it to Trigon.

status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3832

===============================  CFJ 3832  ===============================

      CFJ 3828, which had the following statement, 'A recent rule named
      "A coin award" was enacted, increased the number of coins R. Lee
      owns by 1, and then repealed itself.' was a "CFJ about the
      legality or possibility of a game action" under rule 2553, such
      that if a judgement of PARADOXICAL was assigned to it for seven
      days, the caller of the CFJ would be eligible to win the game by
      announcement under rule 2553.

==========================================================================

Caller:                        R. Lee

Judge:                         Trigon

==========================================================================

History:

Called by R. Lee:                                 06 May 2020 04:16:24
Assigned to Trigon:                               [now]

==========================================================================

Caller's Arguments:

I adopt G's argument as to this CFJ which I include below (the rest of
these words  are eirs not mine)

The CFJ statement began 'A recent rule named "A coin award" was
enacted...' which is a passively voiced action (active voice would have
been "Proposal XXX enacted a Rule...").  I think it's come up a couple
times recently in CFJs, that mere use of the passive voice doesn't change
the fact that there's an action with an actor?

Further, parsing the statement a bit gives 'A recent rule ... increased
the number of coins' which is definitely asking whether a rule succeeded
in the action of coin-creation (a Rule creating a coin is definitely an
action, right?)  So is a past tense "did X do Y?" close enough to "it was
POSSIBLE for X to do Y at the time it is purported to have happened?"  I'd
personally say yes because forcing the statement writing around
possibility is a mess compared to the straightforward "did X happen".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arbitor's note:
Substantial discussion in this thread:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2020-May/057403.html

==========================================================================

Reply via email to