status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#4005
(This document is informational only and contains no game actions).
=============================== CFJ 4005 ===============================
Rule 2201 requires of a publisher of a document, upon acceping a
Claim of Error, to publish the literal text of the revised
document.
==========================================================================
Caller: Juan
Barred: nix
Judge: Janet
Judgement: TRUE
==========================================================================
History:
Called by Juan: 08 Feb 2023 13:11:48
Assigned to Janet: 12 Feb 2023 22:20:20
Judged TRUE by Janet: 17 Feb 2023 06:25:50
Motion to reconsider self-filed: 20 Feb 2023 01:47:06
Judged TRUE by Janet: 20 Feb 2023 01:47:06
==========================================================================
Caller's Arguments:
[none given]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Janet's Arguments:
CFJ 3658 held that a CoE applies to the "whole section" containing the
alleged error. As the statements of the cases aren't precise about what
the "revised document" is, I will take it to mean the revised content of
the "whole section" containing the error.
Rule 2201 does not clearly state whether a revision can be a difference
or whether it must be a complete new document. Looking for other uses of
"revision" in the rule yields only one, Rule 1681/23 which requires the
SLR and FLR to include the "revision number" of each rule. This also
doesn't clearly indicate the meaning, but since the Rulekeepor publishes
the full text of each rule, and the revision number is the number of the
revision of the text that is being published, it does suggest that the
revision is the whole document rather than a difference.
Considering the plain English meaning of "revision", I have consulted
several dictionaries:
{
Dictionary.com: 3. " a revised form or version, as of a book."
OED online: 2. a. "The action or an act of revising something [...]". b.
"The result of this; a revised or amended version of a text, etc.". c.
"A single amendment or correction to a piece of work."
Merriam-Webster: 1. b. "a result of revising". 2. "a revised version"
Google: "a revised edition or form of something"
}
All of these include a definition that suggests a whole document, while
only OED clearly includes a definition that suggests a difference
(though Merriam-Webster 1.b. could be construed to include this).
This suggests that the plain English meaning slightly favors the "whole
document" meaning.
Considering that this is potentially ambiguous enough to invoke the Rule
217 factors, I proceed with a Rule 217 analysis:
{
The only potentially relevant precedent that I was able to find was CFJ
3551, on whether a revision could be a duty-fulfilling report. In eir
arguments, the caller states in eir arguments that "[a] revision is also
a report", and H. Judge o held the same. Although the document in
question was hypothetical and the issue focused on in the judgement was
whether there was a duty, rather than whether the document was a report,
this does at least weakly suggest an understanding that a revision was a
whole report. Interpreting this in light of the later CFJ 3658, this can
instead be (slightly) construed as suggesting that a revision is a whole
new document containing the section with the error.
Common sense and the best interests of the game appear to favor the
publishing of whole documents. Although publishing a full document may
be marginally more effort for the officer, it ensures that there is a
complete accurate (portion of a) report that can be referenced and
prevents the possibility of accidentally publishing a portion of a
report that turns out to be self-ratifying.
Game custom also appears to suggest that revisions should be whole
documents, as this case appears to be the first time this issue was
raised, and it followed a request for an officer to publish a whole new
report after a claim of error. This suggests that there is a cultural
expectation for whole reports to follow claims of error.
}
Thus, with several things suggesting that a "revision" is a whole
document rather than a difference and nothing strongly suggesting
otherwise, I find that a "revision", as required by Rule 2201/10, is a
new entire (portion of a) report.
CFJ 4005 judged TRUE. CFJ 4006 judged FALSE.
==========================================================================
