Index ← 2185 CFJ 2186 2187 → text
==============================  CFJ 2186  ==============================

    Phill sent the message quoted (as evidence #1 - eir registration)


Caller:                                 ehird

Judge:                                  woggle
Judgement:                              TRUE



Called by ehird:                        24 Sep 2008 10:56:38 GMT
Assigned to woggle:                     28 Sep 2008 22:08:57 GMT
Judged TRUE by woggle:                  02 Oct 2008 22:31:06 GMT


Caller's Arguments:

The message sent (quoted in evidence #1) where "Phil Lister purported" to
register: a complete fabrication. I registered that email account, made up a
name, and sent that email. (Source: evidence #2)

Yesterday, the identity claim in evidence #1 self-ratified. (Rule 2170)

[Phill is a close friend of >:D]

        A public message's claim as to who published it is
        self-ratifying, unless the claim is self-contradictory, or a
        challenge of identity pertaining to the claimed publisher has
        been issued within one month before its publication.

Okay, so, we need to figure out what identity is.

Which of these was the claim of identity:

> Phill

> Phill, a biological organism capable of communicating by email in English
> and therefore a first-class person (rule 2150)

> Phill, a biological organism capable of communicating by email in English
> and therefore a first-class person (rule 2150) who has never been a player
> before

(The latter two are probably isomorphic.)

Anyway: I don't know. I really don't. It's up to you, Judge, you poor, poor
person. (Unless you're Phill. (Now THERE's an idea...))

Anyway: if the first ratified, then Phill isn't a person or whatever, e (if
"e" even applies) just sent message #1 (and message #2 was probably sent by
me since it hasn't ratified yet).

If the second ratified, then Phill is a first-class player. Eep. I just
created a first-class player out of _nothingness_.

If the third ratified, same.

When discussing this with comex (in the 'hypothetical' of course...) e said
that e believed the first ratified and so nothing much really happened.

But e also gave another possibility: Since _I_ sent that message, it's
possible that "Phill" is just an alias for me. So perhaps either:

        1. my name changed to Phill
        2. my name... also changed to Phill
        3. my name changed to Phill *and it ratifies that I was never a

I just hope it's not the last one.

I think that's all the arguments I wanted to make. It's all I can think of
right now, so I'm going to leave you all to deal with this mess.


Oh, and you can get me under 2170:

> A person SHALL NOT make a public statement intended to mislead
> others as to the identity of its publisher.

since at the time I sent that message, Phill didn't exist and _I_ sent it and
I was just pretending to be this "Phill". Unless it turns out that something
retroactive happened, in which case Phill always sent it... my brain!!

Incidentally, this and raises another and as far as I know
unanswered issue: is an email address a unique identifier of a person? If
not, how on earth are we supposed to tell who sent a message? And if so,
then who am I when I send a message from another email address?


Caller's Evidence:

[evidence #1]

2008/9/16 Phil Lister :
> I, Phill, a biological organism capable of communicating by email in English
> and therefore a first-class person (rule 2150) who has never been a player
> before, request to register per Rule 869.
> --
> Phill

[evidence #2]

2008/9/24 Phil Lister 
> My registration was sent by tusho though it has now ratified as being from
> I am not a real person.
> Sorry for the deceit and a special apology to OscarMeyr, who welcomed me.
> CFJs at 11.
> --
> Phill


Judge woggle's Arguments:

The obvious issue here is whether the message's claim that the
published was Phill has been ratified. If it has been ratified, the
CFJ is true. It appears no challenge was issued within the
self-ratification time limit, and no challenge was issued within one
month before this message's publication. Therefore, the claim has
self-ratified, and I judge TRUE.

(Note that this does not answer the question of who Phill is for other
in-game purposes: here the only things ratified would be the "claim as
to who published [the public message]". Perhaps this means that Phill
was ratified to be the publisher, but knowing now that Phill was a
another name under which tusho operated we'll have to adjust our
tracked game state. (Certianly, now, Phill is a valid synonym for
tusho.) Perhaps the claim (for R2170 purposes) includes that the
publisher was a first-class person who had not previously registered
(which doesn't necessarily grant Phill first-class personhood at any
other time).)