On 12/18/07, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, comex wrote: > > e.g. I can vote x1048576 without being subject to a > > criminal trial. > > Only because no one's bothered to bring one. If you vote 9 times when > you have only 7 votes, it's a reasonable defense of "I didn't knowingly > cast too many votes, I wasn't sure of my total". Voting some absurd > number of times may be different, and if I was the assessor I would > have called you out with a case some time ago. > > Knowingly attempting an action that you know (based on private > knowledge) to be 100% illegal, while others do not have that knowledge, > is a strong case for criminal intent to me. In these days of multiple > email accounts, we have to take issues of individuality on trust for > the game to work. When this trust is broken, throw the book at the > offenders. I would say (arguably of course) that it is and should be > one of the worst Agoran taboos, and should be treated accordingly. > > -Goethe > My reasoning for creating Fookiemyartug was that I was within the 30 day window of prohibited registration after my voluntary deregistration. I wanted to start playing again immediately and set out to find a way to do so. In my defense, I believed Fookiemyartug's retroactivity clause to be a legal (or at least possibly legal) way to subvert the system and register. I wasn't attempting to violate anyone's trust, and I thought the concept to be very agora-like as it provided an opportunity to test the legality of another aspect of partnerships.
BobTHJ
