=============================  Inquiry 707  =============================

    Steve legally voted FOR (and did not legally vote AGAINST) Proposal
    1177. Hence, the votes on that Proposal were not 11 FOR, 13 AGAINST
    as reported by the Speaker, but in fact were tied 12 FOR, 12
    AGAINST.

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

Caller:                                 Steve
Barred:                                 Kelly
Barred:                                 Chuck
Barred:                                 Wili

Judge:                                  Vanyel
Judgement:                              FALSE

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

History:

Called by Steve:                        13 Oct 1994 04:06:16 GMT
Assigned to Vanyel:                     13 Oct 1994 13:21:53 GMT
Judged FALSE by Vanyel:                 14 Oct 1994 22:37:04 GMT

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

Caller's Arguments:

Firstly, the facts. I haven't the precise date-stamps on me, but I
remember the approximate sequence of events: (times are GMT+1000)

1. Early Tuesday morning. The Voting Period on the Grey Repeals
   closes. Shortly afterward Speaker Chuck attempts to publish
   the Results of the Grey Repeals. The attempt is a failure.

2. Tuesday afternoon, about 1630, Steve sends a message both to
   Speaker Chuck and to the Public Forum, arguing that he may still
   vote on the Grey Repeals, as the Results have not been published.
   The argument is reproduced below.

3. Early Wednesday morning, about 0100, Speaker Chuck acknowledges
   the failure of his first to publish the Results of the Grey Repeals,
   and he resends them.

Now, the Rules. The Voting Period is defined in Rule 693:

      The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal shall be seven days,
      beginning at the time that the Proposal is distributed to all
      Players.

This is the time identified in (1). However, Rule 376 states in part:

      The moment of the completion of the vote is defined by the date
      and time given in the line starting with "Date:" of the Nomic
      listserver message send by the Benevolent Speaker, announcing
      the result of the vote on the corresponding proposal.

So the "moment of the completion of the vote" is identified in (3).
It is my contention that all votes received on the Grey Repeals
before this time are legal votes in good standing. In particular,
my vote FOR Proposal 1177 was a legal vote FOR that Proposal.

My argument rests entirely on the premise that the time referred to
in Rule 376 as "the moment of the completion of the vote" legally
defines the latest time before which votes may be legally cast. In
defence of this premise I appeal to nothing more or less than the
Judge's intuitions about the meaning of this phrase. I concede
that Rules 693 and, implicitly, 955, attempt to define a different
and earlier time, namely (1), as the latest time before which votes
may be legally cast. But Rule 376 takes precedence over both these
Rules.

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

Judge Vanyel's Arguments:

        As I see it, there are two issues in this CFJ: what time various
posts should be considered to reach the Public Forum, and what the latest
time votes can be cast is.
        First I will consider which occurred first, Steve's Vote, or
Chuck's post of the Rules.  I have set up a table of times at which
events occurred: the time Sent, the time Teleport received and
redistributed it, and the time it was Received by Kelly:

(Times converted to GMT)

                        Time/Date Sent Recd by Teleport Rec'd by Kelly

Chuck's first posting:  12.10 05:05:56  12.10 15:10:27  12.10 15:22:15
Chuck's second posting: 12.10 13:13:01  12.10 13:22:00  12.10 13:54:58
Steve's posting:        12.10 08:46:29  12.10 08:46:40  12.10 09:00:01

        So we see that if we take the Time/Date Sent, Chuck's posting
of the Ruleset will have beaten Steve's post by over 3 hours.  However,
if we take the Time/Date Recd (by Kelly, for that's who sent me the
files), Steve's post was first.  Kelly has pointed out that her
service is unreliable for timing; we can see through Chuck's second
posting that it took the mail about a half hour to get there.  And
her point that we cannot count on the "Received" datestamps are
well taken; if this were the case, different Rules would at times
apply to different people.  This is clearly unacceptable.
        Yet, if we take the "Date" (ie Time Sent) datestamps, then
we can also have problems; what if the posting got lost or delayed on
its way to the listserver?  Clearly, the Players of Agora cannot be
expected to follow Rules they never received.  Yet we also cannot count
on individual Players Receiving posts at certain times.  Thus, I am
forced to conclude that the best possible time to reckon by is the
latest time which applies to all of Agora: the time when the listserver
(at this time, nomic-discussion@teleport.com) receives the post.
Reckoning in this manner, Steve's change-of-vote occurred almost
five hours before the posting of results of the Grey Repeals by Chuck.
        The second issue is whether Steve was legally able to change
his Vote at that time.  There is no Rule specifically changing one's
Vote, therefore it is allowed by Rule 116.  But did Steve try to change
his Vote after he was no longer able to Vote on the "Grey Repeals"?
        In Rule 693 it states that "The prescribed Voting Period for
a Proposal shall be seven days, beginning at the time that the Proposal
is distributed to all Players."  By this we have that the so-called
"Voting Period" was over at the time of Steve's post, which was more
than 7 days after the Grey Repeals were first posted.  By Rule 208
we find that "At the end of the prescribed Voting Period on a
Proposal, the Speaker shall reveal all Votes legally cast on that
Proposal."  We know that the "Voting Period" had ended, yet the
Speaker had not yet revealed the Votes legally cast.  The Speaker
was derelict in his duties to reveal the Votes, but this does
not negate the fact that the Voting Period was, in fact, over.
        Thus, as the Voting Period was over, *even though Speaker
Chuck had not revealed votes*, Player Steve was several hours too late
to change his Vote.
        HOWEVER, there is a Rule which throws a wrench into the analysis.
It is Rule 376, "When Does a Rule Change Take Effect?".  It states that
"The moment of the completion of the vote is definged by the date and
time given in the line starting with "Date:" of the Nomic listserver
message send by the Benevolent Speaker, announcing the result of the
vote on the corresponding proposal.  Since 376 has a lower number than
693, it takes precedence.  The major discrepancy becomes whether
"vote" and "voting period" are the same.  In many democratic models,
one can see the use of "end of vote" to mean, not the end of the ability
of people to vote, but the completion of all aspects of the vote,
including tallying and publication of the result.  I shall choose
this interpretation because, I will admit, it is highly convenient
to do so, and eliminates a Rule conflict.  Assuming this interpretation
merely makes Rule 376 define when rule changes take effect (as was,
most likely, the intent) and leaves the definition of the ability
to vote to other Rules (specifically, 693).
        In any case, I judge FALSE on this CFJ: Steve did, in fact,
vote AGAINST 1177 and did *NOT* change his vote to FOR.

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

Judge Vanyel's Evidence:

Relevant portions of the headers of the three messages:

Steve's message:
>Received: from teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com) by copper.ucs.indiana.edu
>       (5.67b/9.7jsm/jls) id AA13140; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 04:00:01 -0500
>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teleport.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id BAA24637
        for nomic-discussion-outgoing; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 01:46:40 -0700
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 18:46:29 +1000 (EST)

Chuck's first post:
>Received: from teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com) by copper.ucs.indiana.edu
>       (5.67b/9.7jsm/jls) id AA27012; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 10:22:15 -0500
>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teleport.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id IAA20866
>       for nomic-official-outgoing; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 08:10:27 -0700
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 01:05:56 -0400 (EDT)

Chuck's second post:
>Received: from teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com) by copper.ucs.indiana.edu
>       (5.67b/9.7jsm/jls) id AA21903; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 08:54:58 -0500
>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teleport.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id GAA08595
>       for nomic-official-outgoing; Wed, 12 Oct 1994 06:22:00 -0700
>Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:13:01 -0400 (EDT)

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