On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Ian Kelly wrote: > I'm not comfortable with this. We know that the nonsense phrase means > neither "to act" nor "to not act". This leads to a judgment of FALSE, > not UNDETERMINED.
I'm afraid I disagree. I know nothing of the kind. We don't have enough information to determine what it means. (By the way, the "to" is not part of the nonsense phrase, that's important in construing a possible verb). For example, nkep could be a contract action in a private contract, which is permissible or not permissible by the contract (and thus answerable to in Agoran courts). > Additionally, wouldn't a finding of UNDETERMINED cause a split in the > gamestate around the question of whether or not comex wins? Unfortunate perhaps, but I prefer not to judge based on convenience of implications. A compromise offer: nkep is clearly not understandable to most Agorans, and thus the burden falls onto the users of the term to show it is an action. If they can provide evidence in four days that nkep is an action (e.g. a copy of a contract, with reasonably acceptable evidence dated to before the CFJ in question), we can find otherwise, else we'll find FALSE. We can't Order this (no Orders anymore) but we can post the request... -Goethe
