On Jul 17, 2022, at 4:31 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion
<agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> secretsnail wrote:
>
>> This is my main issue with the judgement; it seems perfectly fine to create
>> something multiple times in natural language. We do that all the time with
>> coins, which are fungible, we create something that already exists.
>
> No, we create instances of a class of entities, where the class already
> exist but the instances don't.
>
>> But
>> importantly, even if it was against natural language, it's still defined as
>> possible in the rules.
>> Rule 2350 (Proposals)
>> A player CAN create a proposal by announcement,
>> specifying its text and optionally specifying any of the following
>> attributes:
>> So we can't just say you can't do it because of the "plain meaning",
>> especially when that meaning is contested. If I had used the word "create"
>> instead of "submit", I would have expected it to work just the same.
>
> Yes, you can create/submit a proposal by announcement. That doesn't mean
> you can create *the same* proposal multiple times
I'd like a better explanation as to why that is, because it seems like the
opposite. Because tou can create a proposal by announcement, you can create the
same proposal multiple times by announcement, but that action falls under the
umbrella of creating a proposal by announcement.
>
> You can create/submit multiple proposals with identical attributes, but
> you need to spell that out explicitly. It's reasonably within ais523's
> purview as judge to find that the clash between the verb expecting
> multiple objects ("81 times, I submit") and being given only a single
> one ("the proposal _____") is sufficiently confusing that it doesn't
> count as "specifying" the required things.
I disagree that the verb expects multiple objects. It makes much more sense to
expect a single object since i'm attempting the same action 81 times. It would
be unnecessary for me to need to list the attributes of every single proposal
because, as "81 times" implies, it's going to be the same attributes for each
action, not multiple different attributes. If there's a reason as to why my
proposals didn't work, this is not it. If you could play with the wealth stone
multiple times, and you said "5 times, I wield the wealth stone, specifying
secretsnail." That would fail under this interpretation, because it didn't
specify "secretsnail, secretsnail, secretsnail, secretsnail, and secretsnail"
which I hope is not the case.
--
secretsnail
