Does the clause “X is a cardable offence” override the clause “A Card is a recognition of a specific violation of the rules?” The former doesn’t actually make X against the rules.
I mention this, because it appears that the result could in fact be 1,000 broken pledges, and no further consequences. Follow me: Rule 2426 (power 2; this is important, so remember it) says: > A Card is a recognition of a specific violation of the rules or other manner > of infraction that is awarded to the violator in order to draw attention to > eir disregard for the rule of law and, depending on the type of Card, to > impose a penalty. Well and good, so far. A Card can be issued for things that are not rules violations. Rule 2450 (power 1.7) reads, in full: > Breaking a publicly-made pledge is a cardable offense. Okay, so it would appear that pledges are cardable. So, what card is appropriate? Working backwards, we can rule out Pink Slips entirely. Pledges aren’t tied to offices, generally. A Red Card wouldn’t be appropriate, either. Rule 2476 (power 2) spells this out: > A Red Card is a type of Card that is appropriate for serious and deliberate > violations of the rules. No rule makes breaking a pledge a rule violation. Furthermore, r. 2450 can’t override this rule: its power is too high. A yellow card isn't appropriate. Rule 2427 (power 2): > A Yellow Card is a type of Card that is appropriate either for infractions > that have a significant, though small, impact on gameplay or for infractions > for which a Green Card has already been issued. I’m not convinced that breaking a vacuous pledge has any impact on gameplay whatsoever, and no green card has yet been issued for any of these hypothetical pledges. A green card could be appropriate. Rule 2474 (power 0.5): > A Green Card is a type of Card that is appropriate for minor, accidental, > and/or inconsequential infraction. A Green Card is also appropriate for any > infraction for which no other type of Card is appropriate. The contemplated infraction of breaking a thousand pledges seems major, but it actually has no effect on the game. No player benefits (except, perhaps, those interested in edge cases in the rules - i.e., all Agorans - but the benefit is purely academic in that case) by the performance of the pledges, and no person is harmed in any way by the violation of the pledges. Indeed, violation appears to be the very purpose of these pledges. However, no other type of Card is appropriate, so a Green Card it would be - one per pledge broken. Thus: if your message had actually established 1,000 pledges, then you would break it, and I would give you 1,000 Green Cards. However, I’d definitely make you spell out the loop rather than allowing the shorthand “(one thousand times)”. A thousand cards is an unreasonable demand on my time as an officer. -o > On May 24, 2017, at 11:56 AM, caleb vines <grokag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:25 AM, CuddleBeam <cuddleb...@googlemail.com > <mailto:cuddleb...@googlemail.com>> wrote: > Please note that I'm NOT making any pledges here I'm just posting a > hypothetical "suicide pledge" because I think its interesting (and funny). > > ♦️ I hereby pledge (one thousand times) to gain a Red Card. > > (I think you'd get at *least* a collection of Yellow Cards. I don't think > there is actually a pure formal way to get a bunch of Red Cards on yourself, > at least not by casual reading. Suicide scam when.) > > This is my interpretation of what would happen if you posted that exact > phrase in a public forum: > > > 1) First, an aside: at least to my understanding, you don't need to worry > about the lead sentence in that post. Things are only announced if you post > them in a public forum: agora-business for player actions, agora-official for > office reports. agora-discussion's Publicity switch (rule 478) is set to > "discussion," and it must be set to "public" in order for announcements to be > binding. > > 2) That pledge just binds you to gaining Red Cards. It doesn't actually > perform the action to assign a Red Card. That action is reserved in rule > 2426. If you pledged to gain one thousand Red Cards, you would still have to > gain those cards through normal means to fulfill the pledge. > > 3) Just as an FYI, if you make one thousand pledges, they happen in order as > separate events. IDK how CoEs would interact with those pledges if they were > all wrong, or even if just one was wrong. Someone wiser than I may have that > answer. > > 4) On to the actual Red Card part now. Issuing a card requires three things: > A type of card to be issued, a person to which the card would be issued, and > a specific bad faith action for which the person deserves punishment. (I > interpret that it can be any person, btw--no language in 2426 that says only > players can be issued cards.) If the intent of this "suicide pledge" is to > assign a ton of Red Cards to yourself, it would fail because it does not > indicate a bad faith action performed by the person they are given to (you). > > 5) 2426 also tells us that it is a SHALL NOT to issue more than one card for > the same infraction. So you would have to commit one thousand separate > infractions (it can be the same type one thousand separate times if you want, > for sake of theorizing) in order to be given one thousand Red Cards. > > 6) Red Cards only make a player eligible to have the Book Thrown at em. You > can have a massive collection of Red Cards, but AFAIK they would have no > effect seven days after they were issued, unless a player Threw the Book at > you. > > 7) I actually don't know if the effects of a Book Throwing would stack in > magnitude or duration. That's probably a good question for someone who knows > CFJ precedent.. > > 8) Since this action probably doesn't really do anything substantial anyways, > if you tried to do it I would recommend a single Green Card the first time. > It wouldn't actually impact the game in a meaningful way besides putting > yourself in a compromising position. If you tried to do it twice, I would > probably Point a Finger and recommend a Yellow Card. I certainly wouldn't > suggest that the referee assign a Yellow Card for every single infraction. > > > -grok
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
