Index ← 2675 CFJ 2676 2677 → text
==============================  CFJ 2676  ==============================

    It is POSSIBLE to CoE on the identity of a message posted by the
    PerlNomic Partnership since 6pm today.

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

Caller:                                 ais523

Judge:                                  Wooble
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  BobTHJ
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  Murphy
Judgement:                              TRUE

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

History:

Called by ais523:                       02 Sep 2009 18:11:44 GMT
Assigned to Wooble:                     05 Sep 2009 15:11:35 GMT
Wooble recused:                         05 Sep 2009 23:59:59 GMT
Assigned to BobTHJ:                     15 Sep 2009 07:24:39 GMT
BobTHJ recused:                         17 Sep 2009 18:07:05 GMT
Assigned to Murphy:                     18 Sep 2009 20:02:25 GMT
Judged TRUE by Murphy:                  22 Sep 2009 23:29:17 GMT

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

Gratuitous Evidence by PerlNomic Partnership:

["The first" message mentioned by ais523 when e initiated the case]

Message-Id: <20090902172214.1780312124E@normish>

This message serves to announce and make effective changes to the
PerlNomic Partnership (a public contract) and its list of parties.

The current text of the contract is:
1. This is a binding agreement and Public Contract governed by the
   Rules of Agora. Parties to this agreement are known as
   PerlNomicites.

2. Nobody can join or leave this contract.

3. comex CAN act on behalf of any PerlNomicite, or on behalf of this
   contract, by announcement.

4. comex CAN make any Contract Change to this contract by
   announcement.


The current list of parties is:
            Nickname                                    Email
         DarthCliche                      kennercat@yahoo.com
             Pavitra             celestialcognition@gmail.com
              Wooble                     geoffspear@gmail.com
              ais523                        ais523@bham.ac.uk
               comex                         comexk@gmail.com

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

Gratuitous Arguments by ais523:

Although I did in fact review this intent (as can easily be
determined from PerlNomic's logs), I didn't have a reasonable
opportunity to review it (a few hours is not a reasonable opportunity);
and what R101 cares about is not whether a player did review the change,
but whether they had a reasonable opportunity. For instance, Pavitra
almost certainly didn't review the change; e didn't have a reasonable
opportunity later.

Additionally: CoE: you are not the PerlNomic Partnership, due to being
on the wrong server (Wooble claims that Rainer never consented to the
intent to amend the contract to change the server).

You have also probably drastically broken PerlNomic's metarule #3, but
that's not a problem for Agora to deal with.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

How could you possibly review something without having the
opportunity to review it?

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

Gratuitous Arguments by ais523:

You are mistaking the meaning of "reasonable opportunity".
The meaning in R101 implies, to me, that it's reasonable to conclude
that the player would have had the opportunity no matter what the
circumstances; it's generally impossible to platonically conclude
whether someone had the opportunity or not, but it's certainly possible
to conclude whether it's reasonable to believe that they did; and it's
unreasonable to conclude that any PNP party (apart from comex, who
proposed the change) definitely would have had a reasonable opportunity
to review the change even if (like, presumably, Pavitra or Darth Cliche
is) they weren't online at the time.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by PerlNomic Partnership:

["the second" message mentioned by ais523 when e initiated the case]

Message-Id: <20090902175026.90CD712124E@normish>

ais523 wrote (referring to a message sent from this email earlier today):
> Additionally: CoE: you are not the PerlNomic Partnership, due to being
> on the wrong server (Wooble claims that Rainer never consented to the
> intent to amend the contract to change the server).

I accept this CoE.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

That's not what the rule says at all.  The rule says
"reasonable opportunity" to distinguish a reasonable from an
unreasonable opportunity.  An unreasonable opportunity might be, for
example, posting the link on IRC then making the change a second
later, or burying it halfway down a report, or requiring you to pay me
400zm before I would show you the contract.  Waiting for a vote
against a very simple proposal is, on the other hand, a reasonable
opportunity.

It is also reasonable and was reasonable at the time to believe that
you had the opportunity.  Admittedly, it is not reasonable to conclude
that you had the opportunity if we ignore all circumstances and look
only at the timing, but it's also unreasonable to conclude that you
had the opportunity to review it if we ignore the fact that you're a
human being, and I don't see any reason to do one over the other.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:50 PM, The PerlNomic
Partnership wrote:
>
> ais523 wrote (referring to a message sent from this email earlier today):
>> Additionally: CoE: you are not the PerlNomic Partnership, due to being
>> on the wrong server (Wooble claims that Rainer never consented to the
>> intent to amend the contract to change the server).
>
> I accept this CoE.

CoE: If normish.org does not in fact host the PNP, this isn't by the PNP
either.

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

Caller's Arguments:

[ais523's timezone is UTC+1]

It's only possible if the messages were really posted by the
PNP, which is a tricky legal point. The first was sent by the Normish
server (currently hosting PerlNomic the game, if not necessarily the
PNP) due to comex using a dictatorship scam within PerlNomic (by causing
a proposal to take effect even though it hadn't passed to modify the
contract, then using the usual updating mechanism to inform Agora); the
second was sent by a passed proposal within PerlNomic, and it denied
that the first was sent by the PNP. If the first message was authored by
the PNP, then the second one probably was also (unless comex's purported
changes to the PNP itself succeeded to such an extent that the PNP could
no longer send messages not authorised by em, despite Pavitra and
Rainer, and possibly me and Wooble, being PNP parties and not bound by
the changes); but if the second one was, then the first one wasn't, as
it denies that the first one was sent by it (i.e. accepting the CoE);
the Executor of the first message is definitely comex, and it's
plausible to reason that it was e who sent it, given the PNP's denial.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by Wooble:

I hereby announce that the PNP contract terminated when nomic.info got
wiped, due to there being no active players as defined by Perlnomic.

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:59 PM, comex wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> You can only become a party by becoming an active player on
>> nomic.info, as specified in the contract.  Since nomic.info resolves
>> to a Slicehost IP running a competely different site, that could be
>> tricky.
>
> Well, the contract says:
>
> 8. For the purposes of this agreement, "PerlNomic" refers to the instance
> of the game running at http://nomic.info/perlnomic if such an instance
> is running there.
>
> It's silent about what "PerlNomic" refers to if no such instance is
> running there.  Common sense suggests that it should refer to the
> instance at normish, which is the only (known by me) public PerlNomic
> instance.

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

Gratuitous Evidence by BobTHJ:

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 19:41, Ed Murphy  wrote:
> BobTHJ wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 13:34, Ed Murphy  wrote:
>>> Voting results for Proposals 6476 - 6494:
>>>
>>> 6481 depends on the state of the PNP:
>>>  If the PNP has the non-c. text, then Pavitra and coppro vote AGAINST,
>>>    and 6481 fails (3 FOR, 2 AGAINST).
>>>  If the PNP has the c. text, then Pavitra and coppro vote FOR, and 6481
>>>    succeeds (5 FOR, 0 AGAINST).
>>>  If the PNP doesn't exist at all, then Pavitra votes FOR and coppro
>>>    votes AGAINST, and 6481 succeeds (4 FOR, 1 AGAINST) but with no
>>>    useful effect.
>>
>> The PNP was terminated with finality. I don't recall the exact text of
>> the votes, but if they check the current state of the PNP then it is
>> terminated, thus the third option here seems like the likely outcome.
>
> This is the first I've heard of the PNP terminating due to a voting
> process.  Can you provide some details?

There are two possible scenarios:

1. Wooble was unable to gather the required consent to amend the PNP
to point to the new instance. Since the nomic.info instance was down
there were no  registered PerlNomic players, and thus no PNP parties.
Wooble announced the termination of the PNP.

2. The PNP was pointed to the normish instance. c. then scammed
PerlNomic to mousetrap the PNP. E then recently terminated it by
announcement.

>
> Regarding CFJ 2676, can someone provide specific timestamps for the
> following relevant events?
>
>  1) c. initiates an attempt to amend the text of the PNP contract
>  2) c.'s attempt succeeds
>  3) nomic.info's list of PerlNomic players is deleted
>  4) someone uses the PNP contract's pre-controversy clause 8 to
>       redirect the definition of "PerlNomic" to the normish instance
>       (did this happen at all?)
>
http://nomic.bob-space.com/viewcontract.aspx?contractID=40

The history section at the bottom has timestamps for 2 and 4 (disputed).

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

Gratuitous Arguments by omd:

3. Wooble was unable to gather the required consent.  The term
"PerlNomic" then became undefined (because there was no instance at
nomic.info, see the wording of the contract) and reverted to the
ordinary-language definition, the normish instance.  The rest of 2.
then occurred.

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

Judge Murphy's Arguments:

Relevant events, in order:

  1) August 28, 2009 - Wooble allegedly amends PNP to point to normish

(#2 through #9 were all dated September 2, 2009, UTC, and the ones
allegedly sent by the PNP all came from normish)

  2) 16:59:53  PNP (?) announces c. joining
  3) 17:04:03  PNP (?) announces c. leaving
  4) 17:22:14  PNP (?) announces c. joining and gaining dictatorship
  5) 17:30:48  Wooble challenges #4
  6) 17:35:02  ais523 challenges #4
  7) 17:50:26  PNP (?) accepts #6
  8) 17:57:00  c. challenges #7
  9) 18:11:44  ais523 initiates this CFJ

 10) September 3, 2009 - Wooble announces PNP's termination

The statement of this CFJ amounts to "at least one of #3, #4, #7 was
published by the PNP".  Since no one explicitly challenged #3, its
implicit claim of identity has self-ratified, so I must judge as if
that claim was true at the time it was made.

In the absence of this self-ratification, I would interpret that
"PerlNomic" implicitly came to refer to the normish instance as soon as
it was up and the nomic.info instance was down (even without Rainer's
consent), but that c.'s dictatorship was invalid from Agora's
perspective because the other parties had considerably less than 4 days
to review it.

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