H. arbitor,
Are you of the opinion that a judgement has been rendered here, as subject lines generally don't count? (And reads more like an assertion than an action, anyway) -court recordkeeper On Sun, 21 May 2017, Quazie wrote: > I accept 天火狐's arguments which I will summarize below: > > * Rule 2461 "Death and Birth of Organizations" states that "When an > organization is created this way, its Charter is set to the > value that e specified, and the Budget switch for that player and > Organization is set to the Income Floor." > * Rule 2459 "Organizations" states that "A 'member' of an Organization is a > player for which the pair consisting of that > Organization and that player has a nonzero Budget." > * "And" implies that the Charter and the Budget switch are set at the same > time. > * Therefore, 天火狐 had become a member of 蘭亭社 regardless of what its charter > allowed or forbade. > > What this judgement thus implies is that as long as an organization was > successfully created, regardless of what the charter > says or doesn't say about how one joins the Organization, the creator of an > organization is initially a member of said > Organization. If i were not on Lockout, I'd go so far as to prove this logic > by, as part of my judgement, making an > organization whose charter was simply "No person may flip their budget switch > for this organization" - I would be unable to > leave said organization (as i couldn't flip my Budget to 0), but if I created > it, the charter would not stop me from joining > (as 2461 would've set my Budget to the Income Floor). > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:01 PM Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 13:54 -0500, caleb vines wrote: > > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Kerim Aydin > <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > > > It came up as a CFJ when 天火狐 first registered. > > > > > > If you follow the actual precedent, it actually *didn't* accept the > > > Japanse-character nickname, but instead recommended transliteration: > > > https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3467 > > > > > > However, that has faced a "soft overrule" in that everyone ignored > it > > > and continued to use the Japanese characters. And regardless, it > goes > > > out of its way to mention that Registration is a special, lenient > case. > > > > > > On Fri, 19 May 2017, caleb vines wrote: > > > > Are there any pending CFJ's regarding Organization 蘭亭社? I don't > see > > > > any, but I did join after the organization was already chartered > so I'd > > > > rather be sure. > > > > > > Not pending, but this one was DISMISSED: > > > https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3478 > > > > > > while noting there was no way to join the organization, so maybe you > > > didn't actually join? Dunno if it's relevant to the current text of > > > the organization, haven't been following since that CFJ. > > > > > Following this discussion, I submit a Call for Judgment for each of > the > > following statement: > > > > "天火狐 is a member of 蘭亭社." > > This is CFJ 3492. I assign it to Quazie. > > > Please accept into caller's evidence for "天火狐 is a member of 蘭亭社.": > > > > The decision in CFJ 1460 > > The decision in CFJ 3478, specifically the following two excerpts: > > > > > There are plenty of lines which are potentially ambiguous; for > example, > > > paragraph 5 machine-translates as "suitable", and uses the > characters > > > ｢相応し｣ to represent the word (as opposed to ｢相応しい｣, which is defined > to > > > mean "Appropriate"). However, some experimentation shows that when > the > > > word is followed by ｢くない｣, the final ｢い｣ is dropped (both incorrect > > > combinations are flagged up as a typo by the autocorrect on the > machine > > > translator I'm using, which is about as clear a message as a > computer > > > can give on the subject). As such, it seems most reasonable to > > > interpret ｢相応しくない｣ as meaning "Inappropriate", even if this > definition > > > cannot be determined via a simple matching of character sequences > in an > > > editor. > > > > --- > > > > > However, some lines are very clear. Line 3, for example, is a very > > > clear statement of possibility for a Budget switch flip. > Unfortunately, > > > it does not use the word "Appropriate" anywhere, neither in its > > > English form, nor anything resembling the specified Japanese > > > translations ｢ふさわしい｣ or ｢相応しい｣. An Organization merely > > > stating that something is possible has no effect; it needs to > specify > > > that the action is Appropriate. As such, I conclude that there's no > > > actual way to join this Organization. > > -- > ais523 > Arbitor > > >
