Slate is a soon-to-be launched new web-based magazine published by Microsoft and run by Micheal Kinsley. It is probably the first real venture of Eastern "Old Media" journalism on the internet. Kinsley has been roundly critical of current web-based magazines, calling them amateurish and worse. It has been announced that Slate will charge for access. Suck probably best represts the type of "New Media" magazine that Kinsley was most critical of. Self-described as "home of barely bite-sized bursts of uninformative bile with the depth of insight of a college newspaper op-ed", Suck exemplifies all of those qualities that Kinsley finds offensive in web-based magazines. Suck is free. Which will the web follow? This claim pays $1 if Slate ceases publication while Suck is still publishing. It pays $0 if Suck ceases publication while Slate is still publishing. If Slate produces no material before 1/1/98, this claim pays $1. In the unlikely event that both sites publish their last issues on the same day, this claim pays $0.50. To count as "publishing", each web-site must be posting original material (not stuff published on paper elsewhere or originating at other sites) A site will be said to have ceased publication if it: a) anounces that it is ceasing publication. b) publishes no new material in any three-month period. The sole except to 'b' will be if a site announces a hiatus of 1 year or less with a fixed end-date and resumes publication within two weeks of this end-date. If a site ceases publication with no announced return but does resume publication (as did "Life" magazine in the print world) it will still count as folded for the purposes of this claim.
If one publication aquires another (i.e. if Suck becomes part of Slate, or Vice Versa) the aquired publication will be considered to have ceased publication.
This claim will not be judged until one or the other publication folds.
I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post.