============================== CFJ 2226 ==============================
People who do not control the bayes.py script CANNOT join Bayes.
Called by Taral: 14 Oct 2008 17:15:29 GMT
Assigned to Murphy: 16 Oct 2008 05:54:16 GMT
Judged FALSE by Murphy: 23 Oct 2008 09:37:11 GMT
I find this to be a reasonable (and useful) interpretation of section
3 of the contract, which otherwise does not appear to effect any
limitations or obligations.
Text of the Bayes contract:
1. This is a public contract and a partnership.
2. The name of this contract is Bayes.
3. bayes.py is a script whose purpose is to act on behalf of Bayes in
a generally autonomous way, controlled by the parties to this
4. bayes.py CAN cause Bayes to act by sending a message from
5. Any party to this contract CAN but generally SHOULD NOT act on
behalf of Bayes by announcement with the consent of all other parties.
6. Parties to this contract SHALL ensure that Bayes follows the Rules
of Agora to the maximum possible extent.
7. Because bayes.py is not finished, parties to this contract SHOULD
modify it as appropriate to improve its behavior. However, parties to
this contract are ENCOURAGED to develop bayes.py to a point where
intervention can be minimal, except to add new features.
Judge Murphy's Arguments:
"controlled by the parties" does not mean "controlled by all the
parties" (this came up in relation to B Nomic's latest emergency
session), nor does it mean "controlled directly by all the parties"
(e.g. I could theoretically make an agreement with ehird that e
would control it on my behalf). Nor does a judgement of FALSE
render section 3 without purpose, as it still serves the purpose
of being a clear referent of "bayes.py" in sections 4 and 7.