On Thursday 20 November 2008 08:34:08 pm comex wrote: > Sure, Murphy and root obviously > intended to make the decisions to adopt the proposals Democratic, > not the proposals themselves, but Agora is not in the habit of > interpreting messages to mean what the sender meant. In fact, > quite the opposite-- setting power of a proposal, I register as a > watcher... if a person words his message substantially incorrectly, > there is a strong precedent that it's ineffective.
I don't remember the details of the 'setting power of a proposal' case, but when I tried to 'register as a watcher', it was counted as registration for two major reasons: it could consistently be interpreted as an attempt to register with the nickname "watcher", and I was aware of the potential ambiguity but chose not to rephrase the message. My understanding of Agoran precedent is that messages are interpreted as intended /unless there is alternative valid interpretation/. (See, for example, questions of ambiguity vs. clear intent.) I have, thus far, seen no valid consistend alternate interpretation of the message. There is, quite simply, no way to interpret the message as anything other than an attempt to make the decisions Democratic. Thus, by the dreaded Reasonable Synonym Rule... you all know how it goes from here. Pavitra
