On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:38, Kerim Aydin via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > I recuse omd from CFJ 3783 (I know you put forward some preliminary > thoughts on the case omd, which is why I waited a bit, but it's been a > long time on this case now). > > I assign CFJ 3783 to Alexis. > > status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3783 > > =============================== CFJ 3783 =============================== > > Jason Cobb has more than 2000 Coins. > > ========================================================================== > I would like to ask for arguments for an issue completely unaddressed in arguments: How does Rule 2602's use of a continuously-evaluated condition, as in Rule 2350 and part of Rule 103, affect the operation of the "once"? In particular, does it make the "once" redundant because the condition remains true and an action can be "performed once" any number of times? Arguably this is the only interpretation permitted by the text and, therefore, other factors do not apply. Other interpretations could include that the action can only be done once ever, that it can only be done once per triggering event (but this seems like a stretch given the language), and that it can only be done once each time the condition changes, meaning that multiple events in the last 7 days do not stack, and there must be a clear 7-day period between ribbons earned to allow the player to repeat the action. The rest of the judgment I'm quite confident on, but this is not something I feel confident ruling on without giving others time to consider.
