I forgot to mention that the set of winning players does not include any who were impure at the time of the proposal’s adoption (i.e., Corona, V.J. Rada, Murphy, PSS, ATMunn, and Trigon). Because this doesn’t affect the TRUE judgement, I won’t move to formally reconsider and amend it, unless someone thinks I should. But thought I should clarify that for completeness.
> On Oct 12, 2018, at 5:00 PM, D. Margaux <dmargaux...@gmail.com> wrote: > > CFJ judged TRUE: “At least one person won the game as a result proposal 8097 > taking effect.” > > Judge's Arguments: > > The text of Proposal 8097 (reproduced in full in the Evidence section) is > split > into two sections by a horizontal line of double pipe marks (||). The left > side > of the proposal contains text purporting to mark the entire right side as > a comment; the right side contains text purporting to mark the entire left > side > as a comment. The basic question presented here is what, if any, text in the > proposal is a comment and what, if any, text is actually operative. > > The Bleach Rule (Rule 2429) provides a promising, but ultimately > unsuccessful, > method of cutting the Gordian knot. That Rule provides that "[r]eplacing a > non-zero amount of whitespace with a different non-zero amount of > whitespace is generally insignificant, except for paragraph breaks." > Potentially, applying Bleach could permit us to transform this language: > > > In this proposal, any text to the || In this proposal, any text to the > > right of double pipe marks are || left of double pipe marks are > > comments with no effect. || comments with no effect. > > into this nonsensical language: > > > In this proposal, any text to the || In this proposal, > > any text to the right of double pipe marks are > > || left of double pipe marks are comments with > > no effect. || comments with no effect. > > If that were permitted, then we presumably would ignore the nonsensical > statement > above, and the rest of the Proposal would operate as written. > > In my view, that interpretation does not work. The Bleach Rule says that the > substitution of differing non-zero amounts of whitespace is _generally_ > insignificant, > not always. This is, in my view, one situation where the substitution of > whitespace > is significant. In particular, when viewed in plain text, an ordinary Agoran > would > perceive the pipe-marks splitting the proposal down the middle, and would > read > each side separately. That effect is created by the use of precise amounts > of > whitespace. Adding or subtracting whitespace in this case would fundamentally > change what the text signifies to an ordinary Agoran reader and is, > therefore, > quite literally “significant.” > > Applying the definition of "comments" in Rule 106 provides a more sound > method of determining the effect of this proposal. Under that Rule, > "[c]learly > marked comments are considered removed from the proposal before it takes > effect, unless otherwise stated by the proposal." In CFJ 3659, Judge Aris > recently addressed the meaning of the word "clear," suggesting that "the word > 'clearly' can mean 'unambiguously,' but just as often it means 'obviously.'" > > > In this instance, each side of the Proposal purports to "mark" the other side > as a comment that should be disregarded; and both sides cannot > simultaneously successfully mark the other as a comment, because then all > of the text that performs the comment marking would itself be removed > from the Proposal, thereby unmarking the previously commented text. > Nor is it obvious or unambiguous, from ordinary language, game custom, > or any other source, whether the left side should take priority over the > right, > or vice versa. > > In light of that situation, it is my view that the Proposal taken as a whole > does > not unambiguously or obviously mark either side as a "comment," and as a > result, no part of the Proposal is a "comment" to be removed before it > takes effect. > > The next section of the proposal provides: > > > The following players win the game: || The following players win the game: > > Corona || Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > Cuddle Beam || VJ Rada > > Trigon || Murphy > > G. || omd > > Aris || twg > > ATMunn || D. Margaux > > Because there is no successful comment marking, it is my view that both > the left and right sides of that text is operative. As a result, all of the > players named above won the game upon passage of the Proposal. > Congratulations to all! > > JUDGED TRUE. > > > Caller's Arguments > > Just the proposal in evidence, except I'd like to respectfully request > that the judge opine on exactly who won if this is judged TRUE! > > > Caller's Evidence > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > ID: 8097 > > Title: Left||Right > > Adoption index: 1.0 > > Author: G. > > Co-authors: > > > > > > In this proposal, any text to the || In this proposal, any text to the > > right of double pipe marks are || left of double pipe marks are > > comments with no effect. || comments with no effect. > > || > > The following players win the game: || The following players win the game: > > Corona || Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > Cuddle Beam || VJ Rada > > Trigon || Murphy > > G. || omd > > Aris || twg > > ATMunn || D. Margaux > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > Relevant Rules: > > Rule 2429/1 (Power=1.0) > Bleach > > Replacing a non-zero amount of whitespace with a different non-zero amount of > whitespace is generally insignificant, except for paragraph breaks. > > > Rule 106/40 (Power=3) > Adopting Proposals > > . . . Clearly marked comments are considered to be removed from the > proposal before it takes effect, unless otherwise stated by the proposal. . . > .
