Index ← 2636 CFJ 2637 2638 → text
==============================  CFJ 2637  ==============================

    Sending a public message is equivalent to acting on behalf of onself
    (in the absence of an attempt to act on behalf of someone else), and
    is thus restricted by the rule "Acting on Behalf".

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

Caller:                                 Murphy
Barred:                                 scshunt

Judge:                                  Taral
Judgement:                              FALSE

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

History:

Called by Murphy:                       21 Jul 2009 21:57:28 GMT
Assigned to Taral:                      24 Jul 2009 21:50:04 GMT
Judged FALSE by Taral:                  01 Aug 2009 05:51:15 GMT

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

Judge Taral's Arguments:

The equivalence in question is not a mathematical equivalence, but
legal equivalence. Legal equivalence is shorthand for the construction
of legal fiction. "Doing A is equivalent to doing B" means that when
one purports to do A, a legal fiction is created that B happened
instead. This process is in no way implicitly bidirectional in the way
that mathematical equivalences are.

For the more mathematically inclined, one can frame the problem in
terms of uninstantiated existentials. "For some entities X and Y and
some action Z, X posting that e acts on behalf of Y to do Z is
equivalent to Y doing Z." Inverting this equivalence results in an
undefined X!

The upshot of all this is that "sending a message" is still a plain
action, not some sugar for an unknown entity acting on behalf of you
to send a message.

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