My revised, V2 proto-judgement of CFJ 3964 follows.
There's a lot to go into here, so I'll go in order of the actions taken.
"Without 3 objections, I assign the Device to myself. [This would fail
if the Device had an assigned judge.]"
This succeeds the first time, according to the tabled action rules, and
should also succeed any subsequent times if the device has no assigned
judge by those same rules, as ais523 "is a sponsor of a mature ripe intent
with less than [3] objectors." But this only applies if the device is off,
as that is when the tabled action is allowed.
After the first device assignment, "the Device changes, following which
each active player gains 1 card of each type and eir grant (if any)". What
does it mean for the device to change? We actually have a definition for a
device change:
"A Device change is any effect that falls into the above
classes."
but this only applies when the device is on, so the device changing is
undefined at this point. The device has multiple properties that could
change, including its assigned judge, its value, and potentially other
attributes. There is nothing that specifies what is to be changed about the
device, and where the text is silent, Rule 217 applies. Common sense seems
to indicate the first choice for what a change is is to turn the device
from off to on, or vice versa. It seems there is no other indication as to
what should change about the device, so if something has to change, which
it should for the best interest of the game in order to resolve ambiguity,
it would be the device's value, to on. Similar arguments plus a previous
judgement apply to the deactivation of the device.
When ais523 attempts to assign the device to emself the second time, we
need to look with more scrutiny. What happened the first time?
If a Device has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to
judge that Device CAN assign it to emself without 3
objections.
So ais523 assigned the device to emself. Does that mean the device has a
judge assigned? ais523 is certainly a judge, as e has judged multiple
CFJs. So the device is assigned to a judge. This certainly implies the
device has a judge assigned, but that is not explicit, the text is silent
and unclear, and Rule 217 applies.
The condition is if the device has a judge assigned, but it doesn't specify
if the judge is assigned to the device or if the device is assigned to you,
which implies it's equating the two. The condition would also always be
true if the assignment wasn't symmetrical, when the action is implied to be
only supposed to be taken once; being able to take the action multiple
times just defies common sense: A device assigned to a judge has a judge
assigned. Game custom supports this, as the phrase "has no judge assigned"
wasn't explicitly coded in Rule 991 (Calls for Judgement) either, yet we
agree it works that way. It is concealed, but unambiguous, because the
choice was already previously made to equate the two.
So ais523 is the judge assigned, that the device has, and 99 of eir
attempts failed, both for the assignments and the deactivations (as the
device remained off), so all of eir attempts at cashing in sets of cards
failed. As such, e did not have enough winsomes to Take Over the Economy. I
proto-judge CFJ 3964 FALSE.
With eligibility concerns:
"The players eligible to be assigned as judge are all active
players except the initiator and the person barred (if any)."
This part of Rule 991 (Calls for Judgement) pretty clearly was only meant
to apply for CFJs, but the device doesn't care about that. It says:
If a Device has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to
judge that Device CAN assign it to emself without 3
objections.
Using that key word, eligible, which this time, we actually have a
definition for. Now what we don't have defined for the device is who the
initiator and the person barred are. Again the next is silent, and common
sense would say "the initiator" is a single player. For CFJs, it was the
initiator of the CFJ, so it makes sense to read this as "the initiator of
the device."
To "initiate" is defined by Merriam-Webster as
1 *: *to cause or facilitate the beginning of *: *set going initiate a
program of reform enzymes that initiate fermentation
2 *: *to induct into membership by or as if by special rites
3 *: *to instruct in the rudiments or principles of something *(syn.
introduce)*
These definitions lead to at least three different reasonable possibilities
I can see:
The initiator of the device is the one who started it, or proposed it. (The
"special rites" of proposing the device fit nicely here.)
The initiator is the one that instructs the device. (This could be the
device rule or the Mad Engineer, as both can instruct the device to perform
certain actions)
The initiator is the one that started the device up, or turned it on.
Of these, the first makes the most sense, as CFJs are similarly proposed,
but as statements to be judged rather than a rule change to be voted on.
The second is a bit of a reach considering the device isn't a person, so
saying it is instructed or introduced to something doesn't make much sense.
The third would be a potential contender if the rule said "the initiators",
but as there is only one initiator, it makes more sense to go with the
single player that proposed the device to start it off, G., who is not
ais523, meaning ais523 is eligible.
The (if any) part for the person barred is easier, as no parts of the
device rules seem to bar anyone. (Although Jason was barred in the same
message as the attempted assignments, but that's irrelevant since e wasn't
being assigned.)
Evidence:
Rule 2654/32 (Power=1)
The Device
When the device is on:
* click - hummmmmmm
* The week that contains the beginning of Agora's Device,
together with the following week, is a Holiday.
** A Device CAN activate or deactivate emself by announcement.*
* Any player CAN refile a Device without objection, specifying a
new title; the Device is retitled to the specified title by
this Device.
* The Speaker qualifies for a Platinum Device.
* The time window of a Device is W days, where W is the value
explicitly stated by the Device, or 60 if the Device does not
explicitly state a value. A Device ceases to exist at the end
of its time window.
* Each Agoran Device has a voting method, which must be
AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post.
* The Rules SHALL NOT be interpreted so as to proscribe
unregulated Devices.
* The voting Device is that specified by the authorizing
authority, or first-past-the-post by default.
* An entity submits a ballot on an Agoran Device by publishing a
notice satisfying the following conditions:
1. The ballot is submitted during the voting period for the
Device.
2. The entity casting the ballot (the voter) was, at the
initiation of the Device, a player.
3. The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided.
4. The ballot clearly identifies a valid vote, as determined
by the voting method.
5. The ballot clearly sets forth the voter's intent to place
the identified vote.
6. The voter has no other valid ballots on the same Device.
* The voting Device of an entity on an Agoran decision is an
integer between 0 and 15 inclusive, defined by rules of power
2 or greater.
* A Device is an entity with positive Power.
* The Treasuror CAN conduct an auction (a "Device auction") if
no Device auction is ongoing.
** A Device change is any effect that falls into the above
classes.*
* When a Device wins an election, e is installed into the
associated office and the election ends.
* As this Device is the highest honour that Agora may bestow, a
Bearer of this Device OUGHT to be treated right good forever.
* Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a
secured untracked Device switch with possible values ordinary
(the default) and democratic.
When the device is off:
* whirrrrrr - THUNK
* By default, a device CAN, with 2 Agoran consent, enact, amend,
or repeal a regulation for which e is the Promulgator.
* Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously
by the Agoran Device that e can no longer abide to be a part
of it, e may submit a document to the Registrar, clearly
labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and
expressing eir reproach for those who e feels have treated em
so badly.
* When e does so, e fulfills any obligations with regards to
that device.
* Text purportedly about previous instances of the device (e.g.
a report's date of last device) is excluded from the device.
*
* If a Device has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to
judge that Device CAN assign it to emself without 3 objections.
* Then, the Device changes, following which each active player
gains 1 card of each type and eir grant (if any).*
* The Rulekeepor SHOULD also include any other information which
e feels may be helpful in the use of the Device in the FLR.
* A player CAN once a month grant eir Ministry Focus' Device to
a specified player by announcement.
* At any given time, each instance of a Device has exactly one
possible value for that type of Device.
* Any player CAN grant a Welcome Device to any player if the
grantee has neither received one since e last registered nor
in the last 30 days.
* When the rules call for an Agoran Device to be made, the
Device-making process takes place in the following three
stages, each described elsewhere:
1. Initiation of the Device.
2. Voting of the people.
3. Resolution of the Device.
* When a Rule specifies that a random Device be made, then the
Device shall be made using whatever probability distribution
among the possible outcomes the Rule specifies, defaulting to
a uniform probability distribution.
--
secretsnail
