On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, comex wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> Attempts to ratify a deliberately inaccurate gamestate are inherently >> misleading. This may be EXCUSED if the gamestate can't be reconstructed >> (so there's a reason for it), but otherwise it is not. -Goethe > > You're trying to shoehorn my action to fit the crime, admit it. Who > exactly is misled when an inaccurate gamestate is ratified? What is > the false fact they believe?
I firmly believe that the publication of a false fact is inherently misleading. If it is done purposefully, it is purposefully misleading. I do see your argument. What you claim is that you published a document, and that it's not your fault that the document happens to be wrong, and you didn't say "I hereby assert that this document is correct." But that's generally a "washing your hands" mockery of causality, and, as a judge, I wouldn't allow that as an escape clause. E.g. I would say that if you publish a document claiming X, it's the same as you claiming X, just the way that if you publish a document claiming "I act", it's the same as you acting. You can't have one part of ISID work without the other. -Goethe
