Gratuitous:

Game action isn't a defined term; the only rule to use it is rule 101.
Whether something is a game action doesn't matter for any practical
purpose. Even in this case, which involved a claim made under penalty of
faking, the actual truthfulness of the statement is irrelevant, in
accordance with the opinion of the H. Referee. Since the disposition of
this case has no bearing on the game, it can be judged IRRELEVANT. Given
the significant ambiguities involved in trying to divine the meaning of an
undefined term, I respectfully suggest that the honorable judge Yachay
consider this resolution.

-Aris

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 2:07 PM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> That is a good point, I self-file a motion to reconsider.
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:36 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business
> <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> On 3/19/24 05:12, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
> > > Public statements are regulated actions, because by Rule 2125, this is
> > > true: "An action is regulated if: the Rules limit its performance"; and
> > the
> > > "publicity" of a message, that is, what messages are "public" or "not",
> > is
> > > limited/controlled by the rules (Rule 478).  Public statements are
> > > statements contained (and necessarily only contained) in public
> messages,
> > > and public messages are enabled and limited by the rules, therefore so
> > are
> > > public statements, making them regulated actions.
> >
> >
> > This seems to ignore the final paragraph of R2125/15:
> >
> > >       The above notwithstanding, sending a message (in general or with
> > >       specific attributes) is never a regulated action; however, the
> > >       rules may be interpreted so as to proscribe sending public
> > >       messages (in general or with specific attributes).
> >
> >
> > There's no separate action of "making the statement". The action snail
> > took is sending the message, which is explicitly not a regulated action.
> >
> > --
> > Janet Cobb
> >
> > Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
> >
>

Reply via email to