>From nomic-official-owner@teleport.com Wed Nov 15 08:43:25 1995 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by Shamino.quincy.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA03090 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:43:22 -0600 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id GAA03947 for nomic-official-outgoing; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 06:38:04 -0800 Received: from wing1.wing.rug.nl (wing1.wing.rug.nl [129.125.21.1]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA03911 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 06:37:56 -0800 Message-Id: <199511151437.GAA03911@desiree.teleport.com> Received: by wing1.wing.rug.nl (1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA25582; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:36:36 +0100 >From: Andre Engels Subject: OFF: CFJ 826 Judgement: TRUE To: nomic-official@teleport.com Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:36:35 MET Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-nomic-official@teleport.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nomic-discussion@teleport.com Status: RO ====================================================================== JUDGEMENT CFJ 826 Rule 113 should be interpreted such that, even if a Player considers a penalty to be worse than deregistration, e is still subject to it unless e actually deregisters or is deregistered. ====================================================================== Judge: Oerjan Judgement: TRUE Eligible: Andre, Chuck, Coco, Dave Bowen, favor, KoJen, Michael, Morendil, Oerjan, SaltWater, Steve, Vanyel, Zefram Not Eligible: Caller: elJefe Barred: On Hold: Effects: Oerjan gains 3 Points for speedy Judgement Rule 113 must be annotated with the given statement ====================================================================== History: Called by elJefe, 7 Nov 1995, 10:41 -0500 Assigned to Oerjan, 8 Nov 1995, as of this message Judged TRUE by Oerjan, 14 Nov 1995, timestamp lost ====================================================================== Arguments: Observation: This is really what we've been assuming that CFJ 764 says, but I want it as an actual Ruleset annotation. Requested Injunction: I request that the Judge make an Injunction under Rule 789, requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate Rule 113 the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules. ====================================================================== I judge TRUE. I injunct that Rule 113 be annotated with the Statement: Rule 113 should be interpreted such that, even if a Player considers a penalty to be worse than deregistration, e is still subject to it unless e actually deregisters or is deregistered. I quote: Rule 113/1 (Semimutable, MI=3) Players May Always Forfeit A Player may always deregister from the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than deregistration, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. The argument of the Judge on CFJ 764 hinges on the idea that the second sentence of 113 is a consequence of the first. That is, the fact that a Player can always avoid a penalty worse than deregistration, means that such a penalty is not actually imposed. I feel that this requires a clearer understanding of what "imposed" means. >From http://c.gp.cs.cmu.edu:5103/prog/webster?impose : im.pose \im-'po-z\ vb [MF imposer, fr. L imponere, lit., to put upon (perf. indic. imp] osui), fr. in- + ponere to put - more at POSITION 1a: to establish or apply as compulsory : LEVY {~ a tax} 1b: to make prevail by force {imposed himself as their leader} archaic (The other definitions don't seem to apply here. 1b is marked as archaic, I therefore assume that it doesn't apply either.) By 1a: Since the penalty is not compulsory (it can be avoided), it is not imposed. I find that the argument is somewhat reasonable given the definition. (Although not completely persuading.) Since the argument is necessary in order to make sense of CFJ 764 (I _think_ I could legally ignore the argument if I could otherwise support the conclusion) I shall have to admit it. As an aside, I will note that I do not accept Michael's final argument ad Ridiculum. Greetings, Oerjan. ==== ====================================================================== Evidence: Relevant Rules: 113 Evidence (added by Judge): Judgement CFJ 764 (see below) ====================================================================== >From kelly@poverty.bloomington.in.usTue Nov 14 22:49:38 1995 Date: Tue, 18 Apr 95 00:04:29 EST5 >From: Kelly Martin Reply to: nomic-discussion@teleport.com To: nomic-official@teleport.com Subject: OFF: CFJ764: Judgement ====================================================================== JUDGEMENT OF CFJ 764 (Rule 113 can only be interpreted such that...) ====================================================================== Judgement: FALSE Judge: Michael Eligible to Judge: Andre, Blob, Coren, Dave Bowen, Chuck, Elde, Jeffrey, Kelly, KoJen, Michael, Pascal, Steve, Swann, Vanyel, Xanadu Caller: TAL Scorekeepor: Michael receives 3 Points for timely Judgement ---------------------------------------------------------------------- History: Called Wed, 12 Apr 95 00:19:28 SET by TAL Assigned Wed, 12 Apr 1995 00:50 UTC to Michael Judged FALSE Mon, 17 Apr 95 16:22:29 BST by Michael --> Michael receives 3 Points ====================================================================== Statement: "Rule 113 can only be interpreted such that regulation 6 of ElJefe's `No More Contests' Contest is in conflict with it." Barred Players: ElJefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Arguments: Rule 113 states: "No penalty worse than deregistration [...] may be imposed.". Well, Regulation 6 of the NMC Contest imposes *two* penalties on recidivists. There is: Anyone becoming Contestmaster via Reg. 5 must within one hour both go On Hold, and transfer all eir currencies and Points to the Contest Fund. E may not come Off Hold until this Contest is dissolved. and there is: Anyone becoming Contestmaster for the second time via Reg. 5 must immediately forfeit the game of Agora Nomic. Therefore, anyone becoming Contestmaster for the second time looses all eir Agoran possessions *and* must forfeit. Obviously, imposing forfeiture *and* confiscation is a penalty worse than imposing forfeiture alone. Hence Reg. 6 is in violation of 113 and by 1446 Contestants are not bound by it. Consequently the Contestmaster of the NMC Contest, i.e. TAL, is not bound by Regulation 6. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- References (two Rules and the NMC Regulations): Rule 113/1 (Semimutable, MI=3) Players May Always Forfeit A Player may always deregister from the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than deregistration, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. Rule 1446/0 (Mutable, MI=1) Contests A contest is a subgame of Agora Nomic, having its own Name, Entry Fee, Regulations, Contestmaster, and Contest Fund. It is created when a Player posts to the Public Forum an announcement of the contest, including the Name and Regulations. Participants in the subgame are called Contestants of that contest. The player making the post becomes the Contestmaster. The Contestmaster for a given Contest is a Player who has responsibility for administering the subgame. He reports all score changes and currency transfers taking place under the Regulations, administers the Contest Fund, and maintains the Regulations. The Contest Fund is an entity capable of owning, trading, and spending Points or Currencies in the same manner as a Player, but only as authorized by the Regulations. The Regulations specify the operation of the Contest. All Contestants, and the Contestmaster, are bound by the Regulations except where these conflict with the Rules. They may also specify: - how the Contestmaster is replaced, - how currencies and Points are transferred to or from the Contest Fund, - the amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, which shall be in Points, - additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, - how the Regulations may be changed, and - ways for the Contest to be dissolved. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster, or by so posting to the Public Forum. A contest is dissolved when there is no Contestmaster and no provision for replacing em, or as otherwise provided in the rules, or in the Regulations. When this happens the Contest Fund is distributed as provided in the Regulations; if no provision is made the Fund is divided equally between the Contestants. If according to the Regulations the Contest Fund must transfer Points and/or currency to a Contestant, and the Fund does not have sufficient resources, then enough of the Contestmaster's Points and/or currency are transferred to the Fund to cover the transaction. If e does not have sufficient Points or currency to accomplish this, then each Contestant is given back eir entry fee, and the Contestmaster loses the number of Points of the returned entry fees. The Contest is then dissolved. No Blots shall be assigned by this Rule. This transfer is not taxable. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which determine which Point and Currency transfers are legal and/or taxable, or which would assign Blots to any Player. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONTEST --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This announcement creates a contest, named "No More Contests", whose Regulations are as follows: Reg. 1: The contestmaster is elJefe. Reg. 2: Immediately after this Contest is created, elJefe is replaced as Contestmaster by Troublemaker at Large. Reg. 3: The Contestmaster may not create any Contests. E must, if possible, dissolve any other Contest in which e is Contestmaster. E may not transfer any points to or from other Contest Funds. Reg. 4: If the Contestmaster is deregistered or forfeits from Agora Nomic, the most recent Contestmaster still registered becomes Contestmaster once again. Reg. 5: In case any player legally creates a Contest, that player replaces the current Contestmaster, and becomes the new Contestmaster. Reg. 6: Anyone becoming Contestmaster via Reg. 5 must within one hour both go On Hold, and transfer all eir currencies and Points to the Contest Fund. E may not come Off Hold until this Contest is dissolved. Anyone becoming Contestmaster for the second time via Reg. 5 must immediately forfeit the game of Agora Nomic. Reg. 7: The Contest is dissolved when Player elJefe posts a message so announcing to the Public Forum. Reg. 8: If the Contest is dissolved, the Contest Fund is distributed to the Wanderers Contest Fund. Reg. 9: The Entry fee is 1000 Points. ====================================================================== Judgement: FALSE The text of 113 admits a different interpretation from the one required of it by the statement of the CFJ. In particular, it admits the following interpretation: 113 consists of two sentences. The first states that a player may always forfeit rather than suffer a game penalty. The second states that no penalty worse than deregistration may be imposed. The statement's error is to take the second sentence in isolation from the first. In this Judge's interpretation, it is clear that the second sentence of 113 is a consequence of the first; not independent. The second sentence is simply reiterating that a Player may choose to forfeit, thereby exempting them from the Game penalty. The second sentence is tautologically true, given the first. Having demonstrated that there is another interpretation of 113, one which does not conflict with regulation 6 of ElJefe's `No More Contests' Contest, I am free to finish my Judgement (note the unfortunate use of the word "only" in the Statement). However, I should like to point out that this matter has been debated before, and that the interpretation of 113 that the Statement calls for would lead to a ridiculous situation. The careful ellipsis of the words "in the judgement of the Player to incur it" from the Statement conceals the danger inherent in this interpretation. If we were to allow the second sentence of 113 independence from the first (in an entirely separate rule perhaps), a Player could simply claim that any penalty they might be about to incur was worse than deregistration, and thereby avoid it entirely (with the backing of an MI=3 Rule no less). Game custom and common sense make it clear that this interpretation was never intended by the author of the rule, and so it is clear that another interpretation (I provide one above) must govern. ====================================================================== -- 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.