From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Mon Jun 26 04:51:44 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 EAA19852 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 04:40:37 -0500 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id CAA01778 for nomic-official-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:39:49 -0700 Received: from wing4.wing.rug.nl (wing4.wing.rug.nl [129.125.21.4]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA01773 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:39:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199506260939.CAA01773@desiree.teleport.com> Received: by wing4.wing.rug.nl (1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA18830; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:39:55 +0200 From: Andre Engels Subject: OFF: Judgement CFJ 776 To: nomic-official@teleport.com Date: Mon, 26 Jun 95 11:39:55 METDST Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com Status: RO JUDGEMENT CFJ 776 (KoJen failed in eir legal duty as Promotor...) ====================================================================== Judge: Vanyel Judgement: FALSE Eligible: Andre, Chuck, Dave B., elJefe, Ian, JonRock, Kelly, Michael, SugarWater, Swann, Troublemaker At Large, Vanyel, Xanadu, Steve Caller: Zefram Barred: KoJen Not Eligible: Zefram (caller) KoJen (barred) Blob (1005) Coren, Pascal (On Hold & 1005) Point Changes: Vanyel gains 5 Points for speedy Judgement. ====================================================================== History: Called by Zefram Jun 20 1995, 15:42 +0100 Assigned to Vanyel Jun 21 1995, 08:22 UTC Assignment upheld Jun 21 1995, 09:37 UTC Judged FALSE by Vanyel, Jun 23 1995, 09:53 -0500 (CDT) ======================================================================= Statement: "KoJen failed in eir legal duty as Promotor, by failing to distribute legally submitted Proposals from JonRock, Steve, Swann and Andre. Eir Promotor's Report of 20th June 1995 was therefore in error, in that it did not list valid Proposals that e had received." ====================================================================== Arguments: On 20th June 1995, KoJen posted an official Promotor's Report to the Public Forum. In it e claimed to have received nine Proposals, but claimed that none were valid Proposals due to the fact that none of them contained both a Rule Change and a Directive. Rules 594/1 and 993/1 do not require proposals to contain either Rule Changes or Directives. KoJen's interpretation is entirely wrong. At least some of the nine proposals e received are valid, and under rule 1036/2 e is therefore legally required to officially distribute them. This argument hinges upon the unclear wording of rules 594/1 and 993/1. I claim that the normal English interpretation of the words "a Proposal may contain one or more ..." in that context would be "a Proposal may, optionally, contain one or more ..." rather than "a Proposal must contain one or more ...". I arrive at this interpretation, in part, because the words are part of rules that *describes* certain aspects of Proposals, rather than being a definitive *definition* of a Proposal. ======================================================================== Requested Injunction: That KoJen's Promotor's Report of 20th June be retracted, and that KoJen submit a corrected Promotor's Report, and that rules 594/1 and 993/1 be annotated in accordance with rule 789/1. ======================================================================== Judgement: FALSE Reasoning: I began to gather evidence on this CFJ, when suddenly I realized that it didn't matter whether KoJen was holding back Proposals (which is my personal belief), as none of the "Proposals" seem to have been sent in before 13 June. Therefore, his Promotor's Report was not, I regret to say, in error. I can't even call the ASAP Rule into evidence, as the Promotor's Report of 20 Jun was not anything required of em, but rather more along the lines of "discussion". Vanyel ======================================================================== References: ---------------------------------------- Rule 594/1 (Mutable, MI=1) Proposals and Rule Changes A Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. If a Proposal containing Rule Changes is adopted, the Rule Changes contained in the Proposal shall take effect in the order they appear in the Proposal. The Adoption Index of a Proposal shall be the least Index which is not less than the minimum Adoption Index which would allow all the Rule Changes within the Proposal to take effect. This paragraph yields to any Rule which may require a higher Adoption Index for a given Proposal. In no case may a Proposal have an Adoption Index of less than 1. History: ... Amended(1) by Proposal 1323, Nov. 21 1994 ---------------------------------------- Rule 993/1 (Mutable, MI=1) Directives A Proposal may contain one or more Directives. A Directive, if adopted, causes some change in the Game State other than changing a Rule. No Directive may change any Rule. Only those Directives which are defined by the Rules may be placed in a Proposal. If a Proposal containing Directives is adopted, the Directives shall take effect in the order that they appear in the Proposal, and according to the Rule or Rule which define the type of each Directive in question. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing a Directive must be at least as great as that required by the Rule or Rules which define the type of Directive contained in the Proposal. Any Proposal for which this is not true is not properly made. History: ... Amended(1) by Proposal 1330, Nov. 22 1994 ---------------------------------------- Rule 1036/2 (Mutable, MI=1) Making and Distributing Proposals Let there be an Officer called the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 3 Points. A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Promotor. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Promotor shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor shall distribute the numbered Proposal to all Players. At the same time e shall distribute any text not part of the proposal which is required to be submitted with it, but eir failure to do so shall not deprive the act of distributing the Proposal of the effects which it would otherwise have. History: ... Amended(1) by Proposal 1530, Mar. 24 1995 Amended(2) by Proposal 1546, Apr. 14 1995 ---------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 95 07:49:04 -0400 From: cogen@ll.mit.edu (David Cogen) To: nomic-official@teleport.com Subject: OFF: Promotor's Report Several Players have been after me to get the Promotor's Report out. I apologize for the delay. I have been studying the Rules pertaining to the duties of the Promotor, and soliciting the valued opinions of our Wisest Players. Submissions have been received from JonRock (4), Steve (3), Swann (1), and Andre (1). None of these are Proposals. By R594, a Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. By R993, a Proposal may contain one or more Directives. Together, they require a Proposal to contain at least one Rule Change *and* at least one Directive. None of the submissions met this requirement. Clearly, Rules 594 and 993 need to be amended. Watch for a proto, immediately following this message. (When I began to study the Rules relating to the Promotor, I neither expected nor desired this outcome. But I am convinced that no other interpretation is reasonable. How could we have overlooked this before?) -- KoJen ---------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 95 10:01:08 -0400 From: cogen@ll.mit.edu (David Cogen) To: nomic-business@teleport.com Subject: Re: BUS: COE: Promotor's Report Zefram sez: > I hereby make a Claim of Error concerning the Promotor's Report by the > Promotor, dated 20th June 1995. > > Specifically, I claim that the Promotor has in fact received more than > the zero valid proposals listed in eir Report, and e is therefore > required by rule 1036/2 to distribute them. I hereby deny this Claim of Error. The Promotor's Report was correct because no valid proposals have been received. -- KoJen ---------------------------------------- Andre