Sean Hunt wrote: > If BobTHJ is owed the title Three Months Long Service, I award it to em. > If BobTHJ is owed the title Six Months Long Service, I award it to em. > If BobTHJ is owed the title Nine Months Long Service, I award it to em. > If BobTHJ is owed the title Twelve Months Long Service, I award it to em. > > (don't you just love conditional actions?) > > -coppro
For the record, if I were Herald, I would treat these as ineffective by
default unless an explanation were provided to me of the consequences of
the conditionality.
In general, I believe that the burden of effort in these cases should
lie on the actor rather than the recordkeepor. If the recordkeepor
chooses in a particular case to take up some of that burden, then that's
eir choice, but does not create any obligation for em to do so in the
future.
While I'm at it, I should say that multiple actions ("I vote FOR all
proposals") are only binding on the recordkeepor if evaluating them is
bounded.
That is, "I object to all dependent actions" is at the recordkeepors'
discretion, because one can only be certain that one has fully
"unpacked" the statement by reading every public message in a certain
time frame exhaustively.
By contrast, "I object to all dependent actions whose intents were
published in the above-quoted message" is binding on recordkeepors,
because the set of possible actions can be exhausted with examination of
just one other message, which is referenced explicitly. The task of
expanding the statement "I object to all quoted intents" into its
component actions ("I object to X", "I object to Y", etc.) is guaranteed
to terminate.
JIMNSH2CO. OMG WTF TLA FTW.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
