The below CFJ is 3868. I assign it to ATMunn.
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3868
=============================== CFJ 3868 ===============================
The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.
==========================================================================
Caller: ais523
Judge: ATMunn
==========================================================================
History:
Called by ais523: 12 Jul 2020 16:25:56
Assigned to ATMunn: [now]
==========================================================================
Caller's Evidence: (The above-quoted message):
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 16:02 +0000, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
>
> {
> To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would
> interfere
> with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
> accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
> long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this
> exception
> overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
> }
>
> (This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir
> job very difficult.)
Caller's Arguments:
The quoted body of text appears to satisfy the requirements
to be a proposal in the Agoran sense, and its author has stated that e
is submitting it as a proposal; it was sent to a public forum, thus
appears to meet the requirements for acting by announcement (the
standard for creating a proposal). It is stated to be a Diplonomic
Proposal; however, I don't see any reason why a Diplonomic Proposal
can't also be an Agoran proposal, as this proposal appears to match
both sets of requirements.
Weighing against this is the fact that it obviously wasn't intended to
create an Agoran proposal. Is that relevant, when establishing whether
an action by announcement has occurred?
==========================================================================
