From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Mon Mar 27 05:17:40 1995 Return-Path: nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.11]) by Shamino.quincy.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id FAA15556; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 05:17:37 -0600 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id DAA20443 for nomic-official-outgoing; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 03:23:10 -0800 Received: from mizar.astro.indiana.edu (mizar.astro.indiana.edu [129.79.160.43]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id DAA20433 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 1995 03:23:05 -0800 Received: from poverty by mizar.astro.indiana.edu with uucp (Smail3.1.28.1 #7) id m0rtCsv-0001UgC; Mon, 27 Mar 95 06:23 EST Received: by poverty.bloomington.in.us (V1.17-beta/Amiga) id <2hui@poverty.bloomington.in.us>; Mon, 27 Mar 95 06:12:13 EST5 Date: Mon, 27 Mar 95 06:12:13 EST5 Message-Id: <9503271112.2hui@poverty.bloomington.in.us> From: kelly@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Kelly Martin) To: nomic-official@teleport.com Subject: OFF: Final Judgement of CFJ 750 Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com Status: RO ====================================================================== FINAL JUDGEMENT OF CFJ 750 (Speaker ElJefe violated Rule 452 by...) ====================================================================== Final Judgement: UNKNOWN Judgement of the Clerk of the Courts: UNKNOWN Judgement of the Speaker: FALSE Judgement of the Justiciar: TRUE Clerk of the Courts: Kelly Speaker: elJefe Delegate: TAL Justiciar: Steve Judgement: TRUE Judge: Chuck Eligible to Judge: Andre, Blob, Dave Bowen, Coren, Chuck, Elde, Einstein, Jeffrey, JonRock, Kelly, KoJen, Michael, Pascal, Steve, Swann, TAL, Vanyel, Vlad Caller: Oerjan Barred: elJefe Scorekeepor: Chuck receives 3 Points for timely Judgement elJefe receives 5 Points for speedy Judgement Steve receives 3 Points for timely Judgement Kelly receives 3 Points for timely Judgement Chuck must forfeit 3 Points for being overturned ---------------------------------------------------------------------- History: Called Tue, 7 Mar 1995 19:19:02 +0100 (MET) by Oerjan Assigned Tue, 7 Mar 1995 19:10 UTC to Chuck Judged TRUE Sat, 11 Mar 95 19:40:52 CST by Chuck --> Chuck receives 3 Points Appealed Sun, 12 Mar 1995 09:39:41 -0800 (PST) by Coren Appealed Mon, 13 Mar 95 14:26:43 WET by TAL Appealed Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:46:26 -0500 by Swann Assigned Wed, 22 Mar 1995 09:15 UTC to Kelly as CotC Assigned Wed, 22 Mar 1995 09:15 UTC to Steve as Justiciar Assigned Thu, 23 Mar 1995 01:50 UTC to TAL as pro-Speaker Judged FALSE Thu, 23 Mar 95 18:59:35 WET by TAL as pro-Speaker --> elJefe receives 5 Points Judged TRUE Mon, 27 Mar 1995 10:16:32 +1000 (EST) by Steve as Justiciar --> Steve receives 3 Points Judged UNKNOWN Mon, 27 Mar 95 06:08:32 EST5 by Kelly as CotC --> Kelly receives 3 Points --> Chuck loses 3 Points ====================================================================== Statement: "Speaker ElJefe violated Rule 452 by sending individual Vote Reminders to the Voters who had not yet voted on Proposals then up for Vote." I Bar ElJefe from judging this. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Arguments: Clearly this act utilised the Speaker's knowledge of the standing of the Votes. It's intent was to encourage players to vote, thereby influencing the amount of Votes cast. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- References: Rule 452/1 (Mutable, MI=1) No Electioneering by the Speaker The Speaker may not use eis knowledge of the current status of a vote on a Proposal in an attempt to influence the result of the Vote on that Proposal. ====================================================================== Judgment: TRUE I Judge this statement to be TRUE. If Rule 452 did not include the words "in an attempt," I would judge this statement TRUE without reservation, since it is clear that 1) elJefe sent separate voting reminders out to Players who had not yet voted, and 2) it is possible that these may have influenced the vote. But because Rule 452 *does* include the words "in an attempt," another question is raised, namely, was elJefe *attempting* to influence the vote? Or would any such influence, if it occurred, have been entirely unintentional? It is impossible for me to know with certainty elJefe's intent; but it seems very unlikely that such a reminder could have been sent for any other purpose than encouraging Players who had not yet voted to vote. Thus, I still Judge TRUE, but with somewhat more reluctance than I would have otherwise. The Rules are not clear on how certain one must be of a TRUE or FALSE Judgement to make it. While I am not 100ertain that this statement is TRUE, I am fairly certain. There is certainly a case to be made for UNDECIDED (or, if 1487 passes, UNKNOWN) on the basis that no one but elJefe can know elJefe's intent with certainty, and thus it cannot be known if elJefe attempted to influence the Vote. I encourage elJefe to appeal this decision. In fact, I hereby call for appeal on the Judgement of CFJ 750. [[Note of the CotC: Chuck's attempt to Call for Appeal is not binding, as it was not posted to the Public Forum, at least not by himself.]] ====================================================================== Judgement of the pro-Speaker: FALSE Arguments: Rule 452 states: "The Speaker may not use eis knowledge of the current status of a vote on a Proposal in an attempt to influence the result of the Vote on that Proposal." In order to establish the violation of Rule 452 the following two questions must be answered with yes. 1) Did ElJefe attempt to influence the Voting Result by sending out individual voting reminders to Players which had not yet voted? The result of a vote depends on two factors: - the ratio of FOR and AGAINST votes - the number of Players that voted The only way that Speaker ElJefe can try to change a positive F-A into a negative one (or vice versa) is by an approach of a limited number of Players, namely those Players that are likely to sway that result. Judge TAL: when you sent out these infamous individual vote reminders, did you send this message to all Players who hadn't yet voted or only to a subset of those? Suspect ElJefe: With regards to the individual voting reminders referred to in CFJ 750, I sent one to each player who had not voted. Hence ElJefe did clearly not attempt to influence the F/A result. On the other hand, it is also clear that sending a Voting Reminder to each Player who had not voted is an attempt to change the number of Players that voted. Hence the answer on Question 1) is yes. 2) Did ElJefe use his knowledge of the status of the vote when he did so? The fact that ElJefe's messages influenced the number of Voters, only influences the result if Quorum on the Proposals had not yet been reached. But that is not enough. We also ought to establish that ElJefe *knew* that Quorum had not yet been reached. Judge TAL: when you sent these messages, were there any Proposals for which Quorum had not yet been reached? Suspect ElJefe: This was not in my mind at the time. However, I recall that the Quorum was 10. I don't remember exactly how many were sent, but I have a feeling that it was more than 10, which would mean that Quorum was not reached on the Proposals then up for vote. Therefore, although ElJefe deduces today, that Quorum had not been reached, he did not realise that when he send out his messages. Hence, ElJefe did not use his knowledge of the Vote Status when he attempted to influence the Vote. Consequently, I judge NOT GUILTY, oops, FALSE. References: 1) Rule 452 2) Message from Speaker ElJefe. === Rule 452/1 (Mutable, MI=1) No Electioneering by the Speaker The Speaker may not use eis knowledge of the current status of a vote on a Proposal in an attempt to influence the result of the Vote on that Proposal. === Date: Thu, 23 Mar 95 11:33:42 EST From: jlc@triple-i.com (Jeff Caruso) Message-Id: <9503231633.AA09889@Camex.COM> To: KUNNE@cernvm.cern.ch Subject: Re: CFJ 750 > Salut ElJefe, Greetings. Thanks for the courtesy of taking my evidence. > 1) when you sent out these infamous individual vote reminders, > did you send this message to all Players who hadn't yet voted > or only to a subset of those? With regards to the individual voting reminders referred to in CFJ 750, I sent one to each player who had not voted. > 2) when you sent these messages, were there any Proposals for > which Quorum had not yet been reached? This was not in my mind at the time. However, I recall that the Quorum was 10. I don't remember exactly how many were sent, but I have a feeling that it was more than 10, which would mean that Quorum was not reached on the Proposals then up for vote. Regards, - elJefe ****************************************************************** Dr. Jeffrey L. Caruso Information International ====================================================================== Judgement of the Justiciar: TRUE I uphold Chuck's original Judgement and Judge that the Statement is TRUE. Since the Statement implicitly ascribes certain motives to Eljefe in acting as he did, I sought and obtained clarification from Eljefe as to what his motives were. A copy of our communication is included below: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi Jeff, Before I make my Judgement in the Appeal of CFJ 750, I would like confirmation from you personally that I have not misunderstood the facts surrounding the case. Therefore I would like to put to you that understanding and allow you to respond. Please feel free to correct any errors or omissions, or add any comments. Please also be aware that this communication may appear as evidence in my Judgement. The Statement alleges that you used your knowledge of the progress of voting on a Proposal to influence the result on that Proposal, by sending voting reminders specifically to Players whom you knew had not yet voted. As far as I am aware, you have not denied that this is substantially the case. Is this in fact an accurate description of what happened? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Greetings, Steve. I appreciate your courtesy in taking my evidence. > The Statement alleges that you used your knowledge of the progress > of voting on a Proposal to influence the result on that Proposal, > by sending voting reminders specifically to Players whom you knew > had not yet voted. As far as I am aware, you have not denied that > this is substantially the case. Is this in fact an accurate > description of what happened? The facts in the above statement are correct, the only thing subject to judgement or interpretation is the construction to be placed upon my motives, as the Rule makes it illegal to use such knowledge in an "attempt" to influence the result. As I stated originally, I did use my knowledge of the vote, in order to identify those who had not yet voted. My intent was (at the time) to encourage voter turnout, so that whatever result was returned would be most likely the will of the Agorans. I sent the individual reminders to all and only those Voters who had not yet voted at the time. I can see that Chuck decided that the only reason for doing this was an "attempt to influence the result of the voting", but he didn't give any reasoning or evidence for this conclusion, and that wasn't the way I saw it at the time. It is possible, however, that I was wrong. Certainly it would have been more prudent to send individual reminders to everyone. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Eljefe admits that he did use his knowledge of the vote in order to identify those who had not yet voted; he then sent reminders to those Players in attempt to get them to vote. Since if this attempt were successful then the result of the vote would be altered, and since Eljefe knew this to be the case, I am satisfied that in acting as he did, Eljefe did use his knowledge of the vote in an attempt to influence the result of the vote, and hence that his action was a violation of Rule 452 within the strict meaning of that Rule. However, I do want to emphasize that I don't think that Eljefe is guilty of anything more than a minor misdemeanour, and that it was clearly committed in good faith and with good intentions. Steve Gardner | "Justice? You get justice in the next Dept. of Philosophy, Monash Uni. | world, in this world you get the law." gardner@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au | -- William Gaddis -- ====================================================================== Judgement of the Clerk of the Courts: UNKNOWN I Judge this CFJ to be UNKNOWN. I am taking the liberty of referencing the evidence TAL obtained (which appears in his Judgement, already submitted to the Court) by questioning elJefe directly about the circumstances surrounding the events in question. Unlike TAL, however, I feel that the evidence available to me, as a Judge, is insufficient to provide compelling proof for a finding of either TRUE or FALSE, and I further believe that there is no way that sufficient evidence can be obtained that would compel a Judgement of either TRUE or FALSE. Clearly the Statement is not such that it engenders a paradox, so a finding of UNDECIDABLE is not permitted, by Rule 591/2. My only remaining legal Judgement is therefore UNKNOWN, and I enter my finding as such. Kelly Martin Clerk of the Courts ====================================================================== -- kelly martin I have been told that when a large group of people believe in a fantasy, it is called a culture. When a small group believes, it is called a cult. When two people believe in a fantasy, it is called love; and when one person believes, it is called psychosis.