root wrote:
On 11/1/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zefram wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
When Agoran Rules allow an action to be conducted "by announcement",
the specific announcement is the action in question, giving the
appearance that we support ISIDTID. In reality, we are recognizing
the actual act of posting a message as the action.
Yes. I'm surprised that anyone ever claimed ISIDTID as a general
principle. The rules are very clear that certain specific actions are
performed by means of an announcement that they are being performed,
and nowhere do they claim that actions can in general be performed in
that way.
Rule 478 has only defined "by announcement" since February 2003, when
it was quietly introduced as a side effect of Proposal 4456 (which
introduced Switches for the first time, and defined one for fora).
The legislative custom of defining action mechanisms in terms of
public forum announcements long predates that clause, which merely
specifies how "by announcement" actions are performed. It does
nothing in the absence of rules defining actions that can be performed
by announcement, and it has nothing to do with ISIDTID.
Probably, but ISTR there were also some cases where the rules allowed
an action without specifying the method of performing it. This would
require more detailed research of old rulesets (using Zefram's archive;
the agoranomic.org archive of a-o only goes back to November 2002, a
few months before the aforementioned amendment to Rule 478).
This is rather a strange discussion in light of the fact that none of
us are actually disagreeing with the proto-judgement.
I'm just playing devil's advocate a bit. When refuting a viewpoint, it
helps to understand the mindset that supports it, so that you can
explicitly counterargue.
