Index ← 3652 CFJ 3653 3654 → text
===============================  CFJ 3653  ===============================

      If a facility has an upkeep cost of 0 (i.e. null), the owner must
      announce an attempt to pay 0 in a month (or otherwise publicly
      note) the upkeep cost of 0 to prevent its end-of-the-month
      destruction.

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

Caller:                        G.

Judge:                         Aris
Judgement:                     FALSE

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

History:

Called by G.:                                     20 Jul 2018 18:47:04
Assigned to Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:      23 Jul 2018 00:03:52
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus Recused:          26 Aug 2018 18:43:21
Assigned to Aris:                                 26 Aug 2018 18:43:21
Judged FALSE by Aris:                             04 Sep 2018 05:08:11

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

Caller's Arguments:

Rule 2560 (Facilities) reads in part:
      If an entity other than Agora owns any facilities with upkeep
      costs, e must pay them before the first day of the next Agoran
      month. Failing to do this destroys the facility. In the second to
      last Eastman week of the Agoran Month, the Cartographor SHOULD
      issue a humiliating public reminder to all those who have not paid
      upkeep fees on any of eir facilities.

Prior to the adoption of Proposal 8055, it was unclear whether a facility
with a defined upkeep cost of 0 (as opposed to no upkeep cost) needed some
kind of announcement to prevent its destruction, but the Cartographer and
the rest of us had assumed it meant "no action necessary" (and all records
have self-ratified with this assumption).

Proposal 8055 created the power-3 "Fee-based Actions" Rule, which 
includes:
  If the Rules associate payment of a set of assets (hereafter
  the fee for the action; syns: cost, price, charge) with performing an
  action, that action is a fee-based action.

and also:
  If the Rules define a fee-based action but the specified
  set of assets is the empty set, then the action can be performed by
  announcement, but the announcement must include that there
  is an (empty or 0) fee for the action.

This implies some kind of announcement is now necessary.  However, it's 
far from clear.  In particular, the "associated action" for Upkeep Costs 
is not a direct action, but something like paying the fee itself, or 
"preventing end-of-the-month destruction" or something.


Caller's Evidence:

Full text of Fee-based Actions (power-3):

  If the Rules associate payment of a set of assets (hereafter
  the fee for the action; syns: cost, price, charge) with performing an
  action, that action is a fee-based action.

  If the fee is a non-integer quantity of a fungible asset, the actual
  fee is the next highest integer amount of that asset.

  To perform a fee-based action, an entity (the Actor) who is
  otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e
  is performing the action; the announcement must specify the
  correct set of assets for the fee and indicate intent
  to pay that fee for the sole purpose of performing the action.

  Upon such an announcement:

    - If the Rules specify a recipient for the fee, and the Actor
      CAN transfer that specified fee from emself to the recipient,
      then that fee is transferred from the Actor to the recipient
      and the action is performed simultaneously;

    - If the Rules do not specify a recipient, and the Actor CAN
      destroy the specified fee in eir possession, then that fee
      in eir possession is destroyed and the action is
      performed simultaneously.

    - Otherwise, no changes are made to asset holdings and the
      action is not performed.

  If the Rules define a fee-based action but the specified
  set of assets is the empty set, then the action can be performed by
  announcement, but the announcement must include that there
  is an (empty or 0) fee for the action.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judge Aris's Arguments:

This will be a summary opinion, I'm afraid, as I'm pretty busy. No fee
is associated with upkeep, because a fee must be associated "with 
performing an action", and paying upkeep is paying the fee, not using it 
to perform an action. Now generally, we should apply similar doctrines to 
similar cases, so it would make sense to apply the fee-based action rule 
as guidance in this case. However, having to announce that one is paying 
the null fee makes decidedly more sense when one has to announce that one 
is taking an action anyway. For this reason, I rule that no such 
announcement is required in this case. FALSE.


Judge Aris's Evidence:

Fee-based Actions Rule

If the Rules associate payment of a set of assets (hereafter
the fee for the action; syns: cost, price, charge) with performing an
action, that action is a fee-based action.

If the fee is a non-integer quantity of a fungible asset, the actual
fee is the next highest integer amount of that asset.

To perform a fee-based action, an entity (the Actor) who is
otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e
is performing the action; the announcement must specify the
correct set of assets for the fee and indicate intent
to pay that fee for the sole purpose of performing the action.

Upon such an announcement:

  - If the Rules specify a recipient for the fee, and the Actor
    CAN transfer that specified fee from emself to the recipient,
    then that fee is transferred from the Actor to the recipient
    and the action is performed simultaneously;

  - If the Rules do not specify a recipient, and the Actor CAN
    destroy the specified fee in eir possession, then that fee
    in eir possession is destroyed and the action is
    performed simultaneously.

  - Otherwise, no changes are made to asset holdings and the
    action is not performed.

If the Rules define a fee-based action but the specified
set of assets is the empty set, then the action can be performed by
announcement, but the announcement must include that there
is an (empty or 0) fee for the action.


Rule 2560/1 (Power=2.0)
Facilities

  Facilities are liquid assets tracked by the Cartographor. In order
  for a facility to exist, it must be built on a Land Unit. Only one
  facility is allowed per Land Unit. The Land Unit on which a
  Facility is built is considered its Parent Land Unit.

  A player CAN create a facility by announcement on the land unit e
  is on by specifying which type of facility e intends to build and
  destroying the build cost. Facilities on proprietary land can be
  destroyed by the owner by announcement. Facilities on public land
  can be destroyed Without Objection.

  If an entity other than Agora owns any facilities with upkeep
  costs, e must pay them before the first day of the next Agoran
  month. Failing to do this destroys the facility. In the second to
  last Eastman week of the Agoran Month, the Cartographor SHOULD
  issue a humiliating public reminder to all those who have not paid
  upkeep fees on any of eir facilities.

  Facilities always have the same owner as their parent land unit.
  If the owner of a facility is ever not the same as that of its
  parent land unit, it is transferred to the owner of its parent
  land unit.

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