Actually, they are different.
The Proposal Distribution (not the Proposal) was CoE'd on the AI (the
Distribution listed the AI as 0.5, which is wrong regardless). Since AI is
an essential parameter, that means the attempt to distribute the proposal
and create a decision failed, by R107. (using R107 language, the CoE
"correctly identified the lack" of a valid AI).
Therefore the decision was never initiated - it was invalid. (This
all happened before the CFJs were called).
So 3745 should be FALSE, unless I missed something.
On 6/30/2019 5:51 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
I created both because I thought that there might be some difference between
the rules for proposals and Agoran Decisions. Apparently not, though :P.
Jason Cobb
On 6/30/19 8:47 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
Both 3744 and 3745 judged TRUE. Not sure what is the difference between them.
The question in both is, when a player attempts to create a proposal with
an invalid adoption index, does the attempt fail or does the AI retain its
default value?
I think it retains its default value.
A player can create a proposal "by announcement," if e specifies certain
mandatory attributes. The failure to state a valid adoption index does not
make the attempted proposal creation INEFFECTIVE, because that attribute
is an optional specification.
For Agoran decisions that have an adoption index, the value of that
adoption index is an essential parameter. As a result, it must have some
value. When a player specifies an invalid AI, then no other value seems
possible aside from the default one.
On Jun 30, 2019, at 4:01 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote:
The below is CFJ 3744. I assign it to D. Margaux.
=============================== CFJ 3744 ===============================
There exists a proposal with the title 'It's caused enough trouble
already' and with a valid adoption index.
==========================================================================
Caller: Jason Cobb
Judge: D. Margaux
==========================================================================
History:
Called by Jason Cobb: 23 Jun 2019 22:07:24
Assigned to D. Margaux: [now]
==========================================================================
Gratuitous Arguments by G.:
When you submit a proposal, it is "optional" to include an adoption index
(R2350). The default value in R1950 is "none" so that likely means the
result (if you submit without specifying at all) is a proposal with "AI =
none".
If you submit with an invalid (but optional) AI, I'm not at all sure
whether it invalidates the proposal creation or sets it at default.
For example, in the case of Rule Changes, if you say "Amend Rule XXXX
([Title])", including the [Title] is optional, but if you specify the
title incorrectly, precedent holds that it invalidates the whole rule
change as overly ambiguous, though that relies on the "Any ambiguity..."
clause in R105 specific to Rule Changes.
Falsifian specified an (invalid) AI of 0.5 when submitting the proposal
in question. So for more general by-announcement actions, does
specifying an invalid but optional parameter invalidate the whole process?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gratuitous Evidence by G.:
On 6/23/2019 9:08 AM, James Cook wrote to agora-business:
I create a proposal with the following attributes and text:
Title: It's caused enough trouble already
Adoption index: 0.5
Co-authors: none (empty list)
Text: Repeal Rule 2596 (The Ritual).
Rule 2350/11 (Power=3)
Proposals
A proposal is a type of entity consisting of a body of text and
other attributes. A player CAN create a proposal by announcement,
specifying its text and optionally specifying any of the following
attributes:
* An associated title.
* A list of co-authors (which must be persons other than the
author).
* An adoption index.
Creating a proposal adds it to the Proposal Pool. Once a proposal
is created, neither its text nor any of the aforementioned
attributes can be changed. [...]
==========================================================================
