On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:01 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-12-11 at 13:54 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > I submit the following Proposal, "Minor Giveaway", AI-1: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I transfer 5 coins to each active player, in the order that they > > are listed in the most recent Registrar's Weekly Report. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > My guess would be "only if enacted", although there might be some > argument over who the "I" refers to. My personal reading is that the I refers to the proposal, and the action fails because the proposal has no coins. My basis for this is that proposals are intended to be read out of the context, not as a documents published by their authors. For instance, if a proposal says that something happens, that happens by the proposal’s own authority, not that of its author, and we’d never consider the author to be the agent for that action unless the proposal explicitly says “The author of this proposal does X”, in which case it’s essentially the proposal acting on behalf of the author. Given that the proposal is the presumed agent, it makes sense to read any statements therein from the proposal’s perspective. Also, I’ve got to admit, I find the idea of proposals talking using the first and second person hilarious, and it’s something I’d love to see in practice. -Aris > >
