On 08/09/2011 10:03 AM, Arkady English wrote:
> On 9 August 2011 15:54, Pavitra <celestialcognit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/09/2011 09:50 AM, Pavitra wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2011 09:35 AM, Arkady English wrote:
>>>> I create a number of copies of the following promise equal to one less
>>>> the number of First-Class players of Agora:
>>>>
>>>> Conditions: The casher, on cashing this promise, creates a promise
>>>> text: { If I have supported or objected to an action, I retract my
>>>> support or objection for an action. I support or object the action as
>>>> specified by the casher. This support/objection may not be withdrawn.
>>>> OR I withdraw any votes I have made on a specified proposal, and use
>>>> all my votes in the manner specified by the casher. These votes may
>>>> not be withdrawn. }; I have not already withdrawn my
>>>> vote/support/objection due to a promise with identical text.
>>>>
>>>> Text: I have supported or objected to an action, I retract my support
>>>> or objection for an action. I support or object the action as
>>>> specified by the casher. This support/objection may not be withdrawn.
>>>> OR I withdraw any votes I have made on a specified proposal, and use
>>>> all my votes in the manner specified by the casher. These votes may
>>>> not be withdrawn.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this won't quite work the way you want. The text is
>>> missing a leading "if", and more critically, "may not be withdrawn"
>>> doesn't work at all.
>>>
>>> The condition of a promise is a true/false predicate that is evaluated
>>> at the time of cashing. It's not in general able to impose ongoing
>>> obligations. Similarly, the text of the promise is simply treated as
>>> though the promise's author had sent that text in a public message. It
>>> can only trigger by-announcement actions, and only at the time it's cashed.
>>>
>>> For a model of how to accomplish the sort of thing you're trying to get
>>> at, I recommend you look at "Vote Issue Series G1" and "G1 vote
>>> guarantee." (Note that these two promises go together; they are
>>> collectively one complete example of how to do it.)
>>
>> Actually, on a closer reading, I believe that none of these CAN ever be
>> cashed. In the absence of capitals, I read "may not" to mean "SHALL
>> NOT", and since support, objections, and votes always MAY be withdrawn
>> (though not always CAN), the conditions will always evaluate to false.
>>
>
> None of the conditions include the words "may not", so I think the
> conditions are probably alright? Also, how easy is it to correct the
> typo of the missing "If"?
*rereads*
Right, I'm with you again now.
Okay, I agree that it's cashable. But there's a catastrophic bug in it
that I think I'd rather exploit than explain.
