From - Mon Jan 15 11:22:43 2001 Return-Path: Received: from gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au ([131.170.42.16]) by niles.mail.mindspring.net (Mindspring Mail Service) with ESMTP id t657ie.p9q.37kbi1o for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 01:53:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA11062 for agora-official-list; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 06:47:12 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 GAA11059 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 06:47:10 GMT Received: (from mail@localhost) by fw.serc.rmit.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.1) id RAA31388 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:54:34 +1100 (EST) Received: from rfx-64-6-196-132.users.reflexcom.com(64.6.196.132) by fw.serc.rmit.edu.au via smap (V2.1) id xma031386; Mon, 15 Jan 01 17:54:25 +1100 Received: (from wesc@localhost) by fozzie.antitribu.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA16845 for agora-official@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au; Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:26:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wesc) From: Wes Contreras Message-Id: <200101150726.XAA16845@fozzie.antitribu.com> Subject: OFF: CFJ 1255 Judged FALSE To: agora-official@gecko.serc.rmit.edu.au (agora-off) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:26:26 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] 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: t657ie.p9q.37kbi1o ============================== CFJ 1255 ============================== Rule 1586 should be interpreted such that the Rule created by Proposal 4090 (Debt Conversion) has no effect, since any outstanding debts and liabilities in Basic Currencies were canceled when Basic Currencies were abolished from the Rules. ======================================================================== Called by: Oerjan Judge: Elysion Judgement: FALSE Judge selection: Eligible: Elysion, Kelly, lee, Murphy, pTang, Steve Not eligible: Caller: Oerjan Barred: - Had eir turn: Blob, Chuck, Crito, David, Peekee, t, Wes Already served: - Defaulted: - Previously Defaulted: Harlequin, Sherlock By request: harvel, Michael, Palnatoke, Taral On Hold: Blob, Michael, Oerjan Zombie: Anthony, Harlequin, Novalis, Schneidster ======================================================================== History: Called by Oerjan: ?? Assigned to Elysion: 06 Jan 2001 19:27:39 -0800 Judged FALSE by Elysion: 13 Jan 2001 11:45:41 -0500 Judgement Distributed: As of this message ======================================================================== Caller's Arguments: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXHIBIT A: Rule 1586/2 (Power=2) Definition and Continuity of Entities ---------------------------------------------------------------------- No two Rule-defined entities shall have the same name or nickname. If the Rules defining some entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, then that entity along with all its properties shall cease to exist. If the Rules defining an entity are amended such that they still define that entity but with different properties, that entity and its properties shall continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definitions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXHIBIT B: Proposal #4090 by Steve, AI=2 Debt conversion Adopted 8 Dec 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Create a Rule entitled "Debt conversion" with Power = 2, with the following text: Upon the creation of this Rule, all outstanding debts and liabilities denominated in Voting Tokens, Indulgence Auction Tokens, or Proposal Notes, are converted into debts for an equal number of Stems. Where the original debts or liabilities arose in connection with the conduct of an Auction, satisfaction of the converted Stem debts constitutes satisfaction of the debts arising from the Auction. ======================================================================== Caller's Evidence: ======================================================================== Judge's Arguments: Rule 1586 should be interpreted such that the Rule created by Proposal 4090 (Debt Conversion) has no effect, since any outstanding debts and liabilities in Basic Currencies were canceled when Basic Currencies were abolished from the Rules. This statement deals with both debts and liabilities. The latter term appears in only 3 rules (one of which is rule 1961, the rule created by proposal 4090). From rule 1853/6 (Levying Taxes): Upon the announcement of a tax levy conforming with the above requirements, each taxable entity becomes liable to the Bank for a debt equal to the percentage stated in the announcement of that entity's holdings in the taxed Currency at the time of the announcement of the levy. >From rule 1887/7 (Default Procedure for Auctions): Upon the announcement of the Auction Results, for each winning Bid, the winning Bidder becomes liable to the Bank for the amount of the winning Bid. Unless specified otherwise, when one of these debts is satisfied, the Auctioneer shall transfer one of the items under auction to the debtor. Rule 1887 refers to "one of these debts," which this Judge interprets to refer to the liabilities caused by the previous sentence. In the context of the excerpt from rule 1853, it is reasonable to read "becomes liable" as "incurs a debt." This suggests that under the rules, a liability is equivalent to a debt. The definition of liability at www.m-w.com supports this: 2 : something for which one is liable; especially : pecuniary obligation : DEBT -- usually used in plural (Definitions 1 and 3 were not relevant.) However, rule 1596/5 (Debt) defines Debt (although not capitalized in the rules, I capitalize it here for clarity) differently from the everyday English word debt. So are liabilities Debts or debts? And which does proposal 4090 refer to? In the rules, the word "debt" is actually Debt because 1596 gives the word "debt" in the rules a different meaning than the everyday meaning. Thus, the liabilities referred to by rules 1853 and 1887 are actually Debts. In eir judgment in CFJ 1257, Judge Kelly argues that Debts are liabilities for Property. Kelly's argument is consistent with this interpretation of rules 1853 and 1887 because those liabilities involve Property. Furthermore, Kelly's argument is consistent with the definition of liability: debt, in its everyday meaning. Rule 1961 refers to both Debts and liabilities. Since Peekee incurred a liability for a non-Property, it is a liability and a debt but not a Debt. Thus, rule 1961 converted Peekee's liability. However, the statement is about the interpretation of rule 1586. Suppose, for a moment, that rule 1586 did not exist. Peekee would still have a liability and this liability would still be converted by rule 1961. Thus, the statement as given is FALSE. I note that the intended statement "Proposal 4090 converted nothing" is also FALSE, but for a different reason. ======================================================================== Judge's Evidence: ========================================================================