Index ← 1579 CFJ 1580 1581 → text
==============================  CFJ 1580  ==============================

    Maud performed a regulated action in this message: http://www.agoran


Caller:                                 G.
Barred:                                 Maud

Judge:                                  root

Judge:                                  Murphy
Judgement:                              FALSE



Called by G.:                           12 Jan 2006 20:42:26 GMT
Assigned to root:                       21 Jan 2006 21:25:48 GMT
root recused:                           04 Feb 2006 21:25:48 GMT
Assigned to Murphy:                     13 Feb 2006 08:46:21 GMT
Judged FALSE by Murphy:                 13 Feb 2006 09:08:47 GMT


Caller's Arguments:

Maud's message, cited in the CFJ, was as follows:

This suggests it may decipherable into a plaintext action.  But it is not
undersandable to a reasonable person without unreasonable effort. (I argue
that decoding a message of this sort is "unreasonable effort".)  There is a
precedent concerning the unreasonable effort standard in CFJ 1460:

(and in 1451 and 1452 cited in that judgement).  For precedent's sake, this
CFJ should be found FALSE even if Maud subsequently provides instructions or a


Judge Murphy's Arguments:

The referent of "this message" is

(1) a URL, which is a metonymy for
(2) the content returned when querying that URL, but /not/ a metonymy for
(3) the e-mail message that led to the creation of that content.

Contrast this with "Maud performed a regulated action in the message archived
at ".  In this case, the referent of "this message" is (3).

While (3) contained a regulated action expressed in clear English, (2) does
not.  By the precedent of CFJ 1460, (2) does not contain a regulated action
at all.