Index ← 3518 CFJ 3519 3520 → text
==============================  CFJ 3519  ==============================

      All actions are regulated actions, or are not actions.


Caller:                       CuddleBeam

Judge:                        Aris
Judgement:                    FALSE



Called by CuddleBeam:         28 May 2017
Assigned to Aris:             30 May 2017
Judged FALSE by Aris:         11 Jun 2017


Caller's Arguments:

From R2125:
"An action is regulated if: (1) the Rules limit, allow, enable, or permit
its performance"
"The Rules SHALL NOT be interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated actions."

And then:
* Excluded Middle: An action is regulated or not regulated (unregulated).
* More Excluded Middle + some synonyms: An action is allowed (ie.
permitted, not forbidden) or not allowed (ie. not permitted, forbidden)
* The Rules do not proscribe unregulated actions (Therefore permitting
them. Not proscribe = permit, due to excluded middle)
* Therefore, the Rules permit/allow/enable the performance of unregulated
* Therefore, unregulated actions are regulated, because the Rules permit or
enable or allow them.
* Unregulated actions are regulated actions.
*  Ad absurdum: Unregulated actions do not exist, all actions are regulated
(action is syn. to regulated action, non-regulated action is syn. to a
something that is not an action).

This is relevant to the Agencies, because "The Powers of an Agency must be
stated as actions".


The caller's arguments are predicated on the mistaken assumption that the rules
permit everything they do not proscribe. There are two main problems with this.
First, this is clearly against the intent of the rule in multiple major
respects. It is incoherent and almost meaningless to define "regulated" in such
a way that it describes all actions. After all, it would be simpler just to say
"all actions". It also makes the order that "[t]he Rules SHALL NOT be
interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated actions" ineffective.

The second reason is that this interpretation doesn't fit is that it isn't in
accord with common sense. Does Agora permit the wind to blow or storms to form?
Of course not! Agora simply doesn't care one way or the other whether these
things happen. There must be some middle ground, some place for actions to be
considered irrelevant to gameplay. Another way to think about this is that the
verb "permit" needs to have some meaning. Even if I say "I permit the sun to
rise", I'm not sure that it would be permitting that to happen. I find that
Rule 2125 implies that Agora can meaningfully permit or proscribe actions
that either:

a) would not be permitted otherwise and become permitted; and or
b) fall within Agora's sphere of control or influence

Because the sun rising, the wind blowing, and me walking down the street are
unregulated actions, FALSE.