On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 18:12, Jason Cobb via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > Notice of Honour: > > -1 Karma to Jason Cobb for calling a CFJ on eir own scam and presenting > no > > arguments about the most critical aspects of eir case. > > +1 Karma to omd for the detailed additional arguments. > > Yeah, that's fair; I absolutely had just assumed I was able to > repeatedly win the election, probably just because it felt obvious to > me, since that was the entire purpose of my proposal. FWIW, I would have > also argued that being able to reinstall an old uncontested winner would > work (and that was in fact my original idea for a scam, but I thought it > would be too destructive). > I didn't bring the proposal into the judgment itself, but you didn't change the basic parameters of what elections were eligible for acclamation. If I had found that the past elections remained eligible to be acclaimed again, I probably would have ruled in favour of you even without your proposal. Your proposal definitely made that certain. I think that arguing that old uncontested winners would still work would have been completely in line with the scam. Certainly, if the text had been a bit more clear, that would have been an inescapable conclusion and I would have had no choice but to rule in your favour. As for R2602, I had just taken it at face value, so it hadn't even > crossed my mind that it would require being addressed in a judgement. > Yes, the frustration was mostly aimed at the bit about the elections. The R2602 thing was clearly a side-story, but one that I felt needed addressing once I realized the lack of clarity in that rule, and the potential, even if unlikely, for your scam to have succeeded anyway. I personally take the view that Agora's inquiry system requires judges to do their best to investigate all aspects of a judgment, even ones that weren't obviously in dispute to begin with. That definitely moves away from platonism, though, and it can definitely be fun when a judge ends up with a surprising ruling about something that had been taken for granted. My own most memorable one was ruling that conditional votes didn't work at all. Notice of Honour: > > -1 Jason Cobb: managing to keep the gamestate uncertain for ~1 month > with this scam attempt (sorry, H. Treasuror). > > +1 Alexis: amazing judgement > > -- > Jason Cobb >
