On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 3:52 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > I withdraw my consent from all rice plans. > If the Reimann hypothesis is true, I consent to all rice plans that will > not be harvested. > (I humbly request that I get to call the CFJ upon harvest-time, so that I > may call a CFJ that results in PARADOXICAL.) > > Also, I intend to, without objection, clean rule 591 "Delivering > Judgements" by replacing "irresovable" with "irresolvable".
I don't think this works? I mean, first off, there are all the reasons why trying to make something conditional on the Reimann hypothesis would just fail. You know, Rule 2518, and the precedents it is based on, and all of that. But even if that part worked, this isn't "logically undecidable as a result of a paradox or or other irresovable logical situation". It's just something we don't know the answer to, which would be DISMISS. (Incidentally, I'm not entirely sure all of the past paradox wins have met this standard; though they've definitely worked platonically in any case.) -Aris
