Index ← 3887 CFJ 3888 3889 → text
===============================  CFJ 3888  ===============================

      On or about 00:15:33 UTC on 12 Nov 2020, in a message entitled
      '[Stonemason] Throwing Stones', Jason made a pledge.


Caller:                        Jason

Judge:                         nix



Called by Jason:                                  14 Nov 2020 17:01:47
Assigned to nix:                                  15 Nov 2020 20:13:26


[Message in question]

Caller's Evidence:

Rule 2450/10 (Power=1.7)

      If a consenting Player makes a clear public pledge (syn. Oath) to
      perform (or refrain from performing) certain actions, then
      breaking the pledge is ILLEGAL; doing so is the Class N crime of
      Oathbreaking, where N is the value explicitly stated by the
      pledge, or 2 if the pledge does not explicitly state a value.
      Allowing a pledge to expire without carrying out an action one
      pledged to do in it constitutes breaking the pledge.
      The time window of a pledge is W days, where W is the value
      explicitly stated by the pledge, or 60 if the pledge does not
      explicitly state a value. A pledge ceases to exist at the end of
      its time window.
      If breaking the pledge harms specific other parties, the Referee
      SHOULD solicit the opinion of those parties in determining an
      appropriate fine.
      The Notary CAN destroy a pledge Without Objection, but SHOULD NOT
      do so unless the pledge no longer serves any significant purpose.

Caller's Arguments:

Making a pledge is not a by announcement action, and only require the
pledge to be "clear". This means that a player need not clearly and
unambiguously specify the action of making a pledge in order to do so,
and I imagine it was phrased this way to allow enforcement of natural
language promises. In the message referenced in the statement, Jason
initiated an auction with an auction method that purports to place a
"SHALL" requirement on em. Auction method regulations are not given
enforcement power by the rules, and auction methods appear to not be
binding upon the auctioneer. However, it may be the case that the
requirement was "clear" enough for it to constitute a pledge on the
auctioneer publishing them.