Well, if you assume an "or" between each clause, then it means Agora is
always satisfied with the intent if the intent is "with T notice" (meaning
once the waiting period has past, no count of supporters or objectors is
needed), eg: Satisfied if (support AND enough support) OR (objections AND
not too many objections) OR (Consent and the right amount) OR (Notice
[no counting clause needed]).
But you're right, the "or" needs to be there to make that clear, and without
the 'or', the weird construction of the 'ifs' makes your interpretation
possible...
On 2/14/2019 5:39 AM, James Cook wrote:
(Also, how did #4 end up in that rule?)
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 13:38, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
If my CFJ is judged true, I welcome any proposal that would avoid
messing up all those past dependent actions. I feel bad depriving
anyone of a well-earned victory. Is there a clean way to do that?
I suppose I could draft a proposal that some specific effects happen,
e.g. "I propose that Gaelan wins the game by Apathy", but that seems a
bit silly.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 13:32, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
I submit a CFJ, specifying:
"Agora is not Satisfied with an intent to perform an action unless it
is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. In particular,
Gaelan's recent attempt to Declare Apathy on February 7, 2019 was
ineffective, and D. Margaux's dependent actions in their recent
message that starts 'I thought for sure people would object...' were
ineffective."
See below for my evidence, argument, and a proposal to fix it. If it's
judged true, I encourage others to consider that other recent
dependent actions may not have been effective.
As evidence, I quote Rule 2124:
# Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if
# and only if:
#
# 1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it
# has fewer than N objectors;
#
# 2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has
# N or more supporters; and
#
# 3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then
# the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the
# action has at least one supporter and no objectors.
#
# 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.
Here is my argument: Number 4 in that list doesn't have any word to
link it to other items in the list (like the "and" between 2 and 3),
but the only reasonable interpretation is that it's an additional
condition that needs to be satisfied.
I submit a proposal as follows.
Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction
Adoption Index: 2
Text:
Amend Rule 2124 by deleting the text "4. if the action is to be
performed With Notice or With T Notice.".