==============================  CFJ 2300  ==============================

    The Executor of the public message that purported to initiate the
    Agoran Decisions on whether to adopt proposals 5686-5687 cannot be
    determined with reasonable effort, other than via a judicial


Caller:                                 ais523

Judge:                                  Murphy
Judgement:                              FALSE



Called by ais523:                       05 Dec 2008 14:38:50 GMT
Assigned to Murphy:                     07 Dec 2008 05:16:03 GMT
Judged FALSE by Murphy:                 11 Dec 2008 00:11:57 GMT


Caller's Arguments:

Normally the Executor would be considered to be the person who sent the
message, not the person who composed it. (Googlebot is, I suspect, not a
person, even though the PNP provides a mechanism for it to send messages
in English via email; even if it is, it isn't first-class.) I argue that
it is unreasonable to determine exactly who the Executor was in this
case, and thus a judicial declaration is needed to sort out who the
Executor was; I also suggest that I am a plausible Executor in this
case, due to having input the proposals in question. (I'd also like the
judge to consider the case of the proposals having been input by
different people.) I argue for TRUE in this case, by the way; note that
the case is relevant because the statement of the CFJ is exactly the
condition for triggering the last paragraph of rule 2170.


Caller's Evidence:

The message in question was sent by the PNP, but it is not first class.
More specifically, the message was sent by PerlNomic in response to a
request from Googlebot. (As of now, do a Google search for
{{site:nomic.info "distribution of proposals"}}, and the first result
shows that the message somehow entered Google's index (although
unfortunately not its cache); as PerlNomic only shows the message to the
client who actually causes it to be sent, the only conclusion is that
Googlebot was the trigger. I have a screenshot of the relevant Google
result, in case it's vanished by the time the CFJ's judge comes to
review the evidence.) It seems that both the proposals in question were
entered into PerlNomic by me; but nothing in the way PerlNomic was set
up forces all the proposals to be entered by the same person. The script
that sends the message was written jointly by me and Wooble.


Judge Murphy's Arguments:

Since the PNP is not first-class, R2170's "the first-class person
who ... most directly and immediately causes it to be sent" standard
applies.  The candidates are:

  1) ais523 (entered both proposals into PerlNomic and co-authored
     the message-sending script)

  2) Wooble (co-authored the message-sending script)

  3) All other first-class players of PerlNomic (approved the
     legislation approving the above)

  4) All first-class persons involved in implementing and operating

and R2170 ranks them strictly in this order, so ais523 is the Executor
of the message in question.