From - Thu Aug 3 12:01:10 2000 Status: R Return-Path: Received: from gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au ([131.170.42.16]) by fb04.eng00.mindspring.net (Mindspring Mail Service) with ESMTP id sohrih.j6.37kbi5a for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 00:00:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA24411 for agora-official-list; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 03:57:39 GMT Received: from fw.serc.rmit.edu.au (fw-in.serc.rmit.edu.au [131.170.42.1]) by gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA24408 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 03:57:37 GMT From: magika@aracnet.com Received: (from mail@localhost) by fw.serc.rmit.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.1) id NAA29720 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 13:59:05 +1000 (EST) Received: from mail3.aracnet.com(216.99.193.38) by fw.serc.rmit.edu.au via smap (V2.1) id xma029718; Thu, 3 Aug 00 13:58:56 +1000 Received: from shell1.aracnet.com (shell1.aracnet.com [216.99.193.21]) by mail3.aracnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA10199 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:56:52 -0700 Received: by shell1.aracnet.com (8.9.3) id UAA20171; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:56:50 -0700 Message-Id: <200008030356.UAA20171@shell1.aracnet.com> Subject: OFF: CFJ 1238 DISMISSED To: agora-official@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au (agora-off) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:56:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-agora-official@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au Precedence: bulk Reply-To: agora-discussion@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: sohrih.j6.37kbi5a ============================== CFJ 1238 ============================== Rule 1930 "Scoring" is the only Rule allowing a Point Award or Penalty for any particular type of event, and has been the only such Rule since it and Rule 1929 "Points" were enacted. Therefore, any notification of the occurrence of such an event implicitly specifies Rule 1930 as the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty. ======================================================================== Called by: Murphy Judge: Blob Judgement: DISMISSED Judge selection: Eligible: Blob, Palnatoke, Peekee, Steve, t, Taral, Wes Not eligible: Caller: Murphy Barred: - Had eir turn: Chuck, Elysion, Kelly, lee, Murphy, Oerjan Already served: - Defaulted: - Previously Defaulted: Harlequin, Sherlock By request: Crito, harvel, Michael On Hold: - Zombie: Anthony, Harlequin, Novalis, Schneidster ======================================================================== History: Called by Murphy: 30 Jul 2000 22:17:19 -0700 Assigned to Blob: 31 Jul 2000 08:30:15 -0700 DISMISSED by Blob: 02 Aug 2000 22:23:40 +1000 Dismissal Distributed: As of this message ======================================================================== Caller's Arguments: I am already screening all my PF mail for Score-worthy events. I don't want to have to *also* check for an explicit specification of Rule 1930 - which no one seems to be giving - or to check whether I'm reading the message within 7 days after it was sent, and can thus specify Rule 1930 to myself by thinking about it. If this CFJ is Judged FALSE, then a *ton* of Score history will be have to be recalculated for no good reason - and I will move to Ratify the Scorekeepor's Report to avoid it. ======================================================================== Caller's Evidence: ======================================================================== Judge's Arguments: Before I look into the facts of the matter, I wish to point out that the statement of this CFJ is poorly chosen. It could well have been stated as "Any notification of the occurrence of such an event implicitly specifies Rule 1930 as the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty." and the remainder given as arguments. (Or even more succinctly "Lee has 10 Points"). This, I think, is what the Caller truly wants me to arbitrate on. Unfortunately with the statement as given, I am bound to judge true only if all the following conditions are all true: i) Rule 1930 "Scoring" is the only Rule allowing a Point Award or Penalty for any particular type of event ii) Rule 1930 has been the only such Rule since it and Rule 1929 "Points" were enacted. iii) Any notification of the occurrence of such an event implicitly specifies Rule 1930 as the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty. Not only is this an extra burden on the Judge, but it may also be the case that statement (iii) is true while one or more of the other statements is not. The CFJ would then have to be judged FALSE, and the issue at stake would remain undecided. Now, taking each of these conditions in turn: i) Rule 1930 "Scoring" is the only Rule allowing a Point Award or Penalty for any particular type of event Indeed, I can find no other rule in the ruleset which describes specific Point Awards or Penalties for any events, so I judge this condition to be true. ii) Rule 1930 has been the only such Rule since it and Rule 1929 "Points" were enacted. This is a little harder to ascertain, as it requires me to examine all rules that have existed since Feb 23 this year. I have consulted the Escribe archives and checked every Short Logical Ruleset published since that date. I can find no evidence of any other rule ever having existed which described Point Awards or Penalties for particular events, so I judge this condition to also be true. iii) Any notification of the occurrence of such an event implicitly specifies Rule 1930 as the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty. This is the heart of the issue. I presume that the Caller's interest in whether the statement specifies Rule 1930 is related to the requirement in Rule 1929: Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is invalid: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event So does a statement such as "harvel is Awarded 10 Points for winning a contested election", specify (or indicate) Rule 1930 as the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty? We have debated the nature of communication before in this game, and I think it is agreed that all communication involves some explicit and some implicit information. Clearly Rule 1930 is not mentioned specifically. The question is whether the explicit information in the statement is enough to imply that it is the acting Rule. This prompts us to ask, "Imply to whom?". This statement might imply different things to different Players. Certainly, this judge was not aware before reading this CFJ that Rule 1930 was the rule that defined point awards and penalties. So a statement like the example above would not inform em in any way about the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty. If we interpret rule 1929 to say that the indication must be made to all Players, then this is a straightforward counter- example. But there is another possibility, which I consider more likely: It may only be the Scorekeepor who needs to be informed. The message in question need only be sent to the Scorekeepor, so it is sensible to assume that e is the one who has to interpret it. Still, it is by no means certain that the Scorekeepor will generally be able to form the necessary implications of the statement. It is more likely that e would know the identity of the Rule that regulates point awards and penalties, but it is by no means certain. This doubt arises because of the generality of the statement. I am not called upon to judge whether any particular statements made in the past have specified Rule 1930 to a particular Scorekeepor. Instead I have to determine whether any statement of this kind would in general implicitly specify Rule 1930. To this I cannot give an answer. Without a definite answer to this problem, I determine this statement to be undecidable, and rule that it be dismissed. I encourage the Caller to submit another CFJ of a more specific nature about particular scoring events that have already been processed. ======================================================================== Judge's Evidence: Rule 1929/1 (Power=1) Points Points are a measure of a Player's unloserliness. The number of Points a Player has is called eir Score. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A new Player, or a Player with no Score starts with a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is invalid: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event Having a Score of 200 Points or more is a Win Condition. If at any time a Player Wins the Game, all Player's Scores shall instantly be set to zero. History: Created by Proposal 3977 (Wes), Feb. 23 2000 Amended(1) by Propsoal 3993 (t), Apr. 20 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1930/0 (Power=1) Scoring If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded a number of Points equal to twice the number of AGAINST Votes cast on that Proposal. If a Player submits an Insane Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 5 Points, in addition to any other Awards for that particular Proposal. If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player gains a Patent Title, e may be Awarded 5 Points. If a Player is granted a Degree, e may be Awarded 10 Points. History: Created by Proposal 3977 (Wes), Feb. 23 2000 ========================================================================