Janet wrote:
On 1/17/25 13:47, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
I call for judgement on the statement "If a player publicly quotes a
distribution of an Agoran decision on whether to adopt a proposl,
adding 'I vote AGAINT' immediately after the quote, this would
generally be interpreted as a vote AGAINST the decision".
Evidence and arguments: The specific misspelled word AGAINT has quite
some history. Back in 2001, a player had set up a code in which
"AGAINT" represented a vote FOR a proposal – see CFJ 1260 for the
details. CFJ 1885 later (in 2008) found that, despite it being
generally known that "AGAINT" was meant to mean "FOR" (thus leading to
potential ambiguity between "AGAINT" being used as a cute way to say
"FOR" and "AGAINT" being an actual typo for "AGAINST"), it meant
AGAINST, but as late as 2012 some players were still interpreting it as
ambiguous despite this (e.g.
<https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2012-September/030331.html>),
and it may have become a matter of game custom that "AGAINT is
ambiguous and does not resolve to a vote" (apparently the previous CFJ
had been forgotten).
It's now 2025. Is there enough memory of the ambiguous history of
AGAINT left for it to have any reasonable interpretation other than as
a typo for AGAINST? (Note: the CFJ appears earlier in this message than
these arguments do, so the judge should probably evaluate the CFJ as
though the argument are not publicly known, although I'm interested in
whether the mere fact of me posting these arguments has made it
ambiguous again.)
Gratuitous:
As Assessor, despite being aware that it was originally used as a code
for "FOR" (though not the subsequent history), I have been counting
"AGAINT" as a vote AGAINST. If I recall correctly, Murphy (the player
whose vote brought up this question, even though the CFJ statement
doesn't mention any specific vote) has stated that e only does this when
e doesn't care how the vote is counted, but I don't have time to go
looking for the statement right now.
I probably did state that, and if not then I do so now.
--
[ANSC H:GE V:G B:0]
