==============================  CFJ 1944  ==============================

    If I were to post to a public forum any of the following statements,
    I would be a player:  1.  I am a player.  2.  I declare myself to be
    a player.

========================================================================

Caller:                                 Blaise Pascal

Judge:                                  Machiavelli
Judgement:                              


Judge:                                  Pavitra
Judgement:                              FALSE

========================================================================

History:

Called by Blaise Pascal:                09 May 2008 14:53:05 GMT
Assigned to Machiavelli:                11 May 2008 04:44:26 GMT
Machiavelli recused:                    23 May 2008 13:51:56 GMT
Assigned to Pavitra:                    23 May 2008 13:54:36 GMT
Judged FALSE by Pavitra:                26 May 2008 23:34:26 GMT

========================================================================

Caller's Arguments:

The rules concerning registration and playerhood are set up so that
there is no practical difference between being registered and being a
player.  Practice, although not explicit in the rules, uses
"registered person" and "player" synonymously.

The rules allow a person to register themselves, and also explicitly
allows other similar statements (such as a wish to be registered, a
desire to be registered, etc).  Game custom is to make it easy for new
players to join without being chased away by pedantic players saying
"You didn't do that right.  Try again".

As such, the synonymity of the states of playerhood and registration,
as well as the laxity in the registration rules and the game custom
should allow statements such a those in question in this CFJ to be
sufficient to allow an unregistered person to register, and thus
become a player.  As an example, recently a person attempted to
register as a player with the statement "I join Agora".  No hew and
cry resulted from that attempt, and all are acting as if it were
successful.

In short, a person can declare emself to be a player.

========================================================================

Judge Pavitra's Arguments:

The caller's arguments primarily deal with the way Agora undoubtedly
ought to behave, and on that basis I do not deny the syllogism.
However, rule 217 clearly places the text of the rules before game
custom, common sense, or the best interests of the game.

A statement such as "I join Agora" may be reasonably interpreted as a
valid R754(1) synonym for "I register", and CFJ 1275 supports this. To
bracket the situation, an attempt to register sent to the discussion
forum would be clearly invalid. Not all attempts to register, then,
are necessarily valid.

The first statement under question differs from "I join Agora" in that
it describes an attribute rather than an action. The final paragraph of
rule 478 specifically authorizes self-fulfilling assertions of actions,
thus placing verb-statements on a different level than
adjective-statements. "I am a player" can only be read as an assertion
that the author of the statement is already a player, and this type of
assertion does in fact occur with regularity in the context of the
Registrar's report. Thus, "I am a player" would not cause its publisher
to register.

The second statement is phrased as an action, and as such is empowered
by rule 478. However, the action taken is that of asserting playerhood,
not of gaining it. "I declare myself to be a player" successfully, but
possibly untruthfully, asserts that the author of the message is a
player. This statement would also not cause its publisher to register.

I therefore judge CFJ 1944 FALSE.

However, as the caller's arguments point out, this situation is not in
the best interests of Agora. I therefore urge the entire playerbase to
act to correct the legislative oversight at once.

I also wish to take this opportunity to mildly reprimand the caller for
using the word "any", which has generated some controversy for its
ambiguity, instead of "both" or "either" according to which e meant.

========================================================================