Index ← 3550 CFJ 3551 3552 → text
==============================  CFJ 3551  ==============================

      If V.J. Rada posted the following text contained in braces
      to a public forum {{I CoE my Reportor's report for no reason, 
      accept it, publish the following report and claim 5 Shinies.
      Title: Newspaper ---Words---}} Agora would transfer em 5 Shinies.

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

Caller:                       V.J. Rada   

Judge:                        o
Judgement:                    TRUE

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

History:

Called by V.J. Rada:          01 Aug 2017           
Assigned to o:                01 Aug 2017
Judged TRUE by o:             03 Aug 2017
Motion to Reconsider filed:   03 Aug 2017
Judged TRUE by o:             19 Aug 2017

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

Gratuitous Arguments by Aris:

I think there's a scamable hole in the rule "Rewards". It says that the
reward for "Publishing a duty-fulfilling report" is "5 shinies". If you CoE
your own report, then it's your duty to revise it. The revision is also a
report, and it is at that point your duty to publish it. This allows you
steal all of Agora's shinies by CoEing your own report, accepting, and
publishing revisions indefinitely many times.

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

Judge's Arguments

I find the statement quoted above, which is too awkward to repeat here,
TRUE.

The proposition hinges on the notion that, per rule 2496 ("Rewards"),
publishing a revision to an erroneous report is itself a
"duty-fulfilling report." No rule fully defines duties; for the report
in question, the closest rule is rule 2143 ("Official Reports and
Duties"), which states, in part:

> 1. If any task is defined by the rules as part of that person's
> weekly duties, then e SHALL perform it at least once each
> week.  If any information is defined by the rules as part of
> that person's weekly report, then e SHALL maintain all such
> information, and the publication of all such information is
> part of eir weekly duties.

Under a plain interpretation of this rule, an officer has a duty to
publish a report at least once a week. Furthermore, rule 2201
("Self-Ratification") states:

> 2. A claim of error, appropriate for matters of fact.  The
> publisher of the original document SHALL (if e was required
> to publish that document) or SHOULD (otherwise) do one of
> the following in a timely fashion:
> 
> 1. Deny the claim (causing it to cease to be a doubt).
> 2. Publish a revision.
> 3. Initiate an inquiry case regarding the truth of the
> claim (if the subject is actually a matter of law),
> or cite a relevant existing inquiry case.

Under a plain interpretation of this rule, an officer has a duty to
publish revisions (or to deny the claimed errors, or inquire further,
neither of which are relevant here) once a claim of error has been issued.

Between these two rules, it is clear that repeatedly revising a report
over trivial claims of error would, in fact, fulfil a duty each time.

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