Zefram wrote:
> Applying R1503 and CFJ 1686 together appears to yield the conclusion
> that non-players are not bound by R1742 to abide by their contracts,
> and so that a non-player cannot be punished for breach of contract.
This is what broke when you removed Civil CFJs. Under Civil CFJs,
the contract itself (e.g. what the non-player agreed to when e agreed
to be bound by an Agoran agreement) would state that parties agreed
to be bound by adjudication decided by agoran courts. It would come
down to enforcement, of course, but the following could THEORETICALLY
work under Civil CFJs:
1. Two non-players make an agreement to exchange real-world
currencies, and agree disputes would be settled/binding by agora.
2. A dispute arises, and Agora decides one party owes the
other party something.
3. A real world court (e.g. a jurisdiction with enforcement)
would find that the Agoran arbitration was binding and uphold
the Agoran decision, as it was an agreed medium of arbitration
between the parties.
Now, with no mechanism for a judge to determine civil reparations,
that's gone. The criminal courts have no bearing on non-players,
as not only are the punishments meaningless, but the non-players
never agreed to be subject to them.
-Goethe
