Index ← 2213 CFJ 2214 2215 → text
=========================  Criminal Case 2214  =========================

    Wooble violated 2170 for claiming to be tusho (an old name of mine).

========================================================================

Caller:                                 ehird
Barred:                                 Wooble
Barred:                                 ais523

Judge:                                  Taral
Judgement:                              INNOCENT

========================================================================

History:

Called by ehird:                        07 Oct 2008 16:09:25 GMT
Defendant Wooble informed:              08 Oct 2008 11:45:15 GMT
Pre-trial phase ended:                  08 Oct 2008 13:02:54 GMT
Assigned to Taral:                      09 Oct 2008 03:00:14 GMT
Judged INNOCENT by Taral:               13 Oct 2008 22:07:23 GMT

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by ehird:

[intent to initiate]

Nick changes are arguably messages, as they are sent to everyone in the
channel.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Evidence by ehird:

> gspear is now known as tusho.
> [16:52] ehird: Oh dear.
> [16:53] You kicked tusho from the chat room. (ehird)
> [16:53] ehird: I don't know what he was going to do but I can
> probably guess.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by Zefram:

[support to initiate]


========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by Wooble:

[support to initiate]


========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by Wooble:

The relevant portion of Rule 2170 which I'm alleged to have violated states:
      A person SHALL NOT make a public statement intended to mislead
      others as to the identity of its publisher.

I'm completely INNOCENT.  Even if the IRC channel in which the act was
alleged to have occurred was a Public Forum at the time it allegedly
occurred (which is itself the subject of a CFJ), I made no statements
in that Forum while my nickname was set to anything other than
"gspear", my first initial followed by my last name, or "Wooble"
followed by 0 or more characters.  I did, very briefly, have my
nickname set to "tusho", but made no Public Statements while that
nickname was set.  The idea that the act of changing my nickname was
itself a public statement doesn't hold water; the setting of an IRC
nickname is a mere change in metadata; the fact that the change is
reported as text to the users of most IRC clients is irrelevant; this
metadata is analogous to email headers, which precedent holds are not
capable of holding public statements or causing game actions.

Even had I made such public statements there was no probability
whatsoever that anyone would have been misled as to my identity; my
previous nickname was displayed on the screen, ehird was in the
channel (as an admin, no less), and everyone else in the channel was
clearly aware of the identities of both ehird and myself.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by ehird:

:ehird!n=ehird@eso-std.org PRIVMSG #really-a-cow :This is a test.
:ehird!n=ehird@eso-std.org NICK :foobarbazquux
:foobarbazquux!n=ehird@eso-std.org PRIVMSG #really-a-cow :It is
certainly a message, and that is how it is specified in the IRC
protocol - just not of the PRIVMSG kind. It's explicitly sent as a
message. That is not metadata.
:foobarbazquux!n=ehird@eso-std.org PRIVMSG #really-a-cow :It just so
happens that IRC has different types of messages.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by Wooble:

The Public Forum in question is the channel #really-a-cow.  According
to RFC 1459, NICK messages are not sent to the channel but to the
server; the fact that the server relays them to the clients of the
users who happen to be in the channel, and that those clients often
choose to display them as if they're messages in the channel itself
does not mean that the message is sent via the channel and thus via
the Public Forum.  If you send me an email message with the subject
"BUS: whatever" and other appropriate headers, my email client may
display it in a thread with public messages; this doesn't mean that
the message was sent via the public forum.

========================================================================

Judge Taral's Arguments:

I find Woobel INNOCENT. The "NICK" "message", as pointed out, was not
directed to the (alleged) Public Forum and thus was not a public
statement. (Note the lack of #really-a-cow in the IRC log entry.)

========================================================================