On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Ed Murphy wrote: > Goethe wrote: > >> Solutions proposed: >> 1. judicially declare all actions performed by "annabel" to be >> (retroactively) ineffective because, in retrospect, the messages didn't >> constitute clear communication as to whom they applied to (I still think >> this would have and did work, hence no crisis, but this was a minority >> view). > > I don't remember this being brought up. It would have required > recalculating the gamestate to account for the removal of Annabel's > purported actions, except that #3 later patched over it.
I remember someone doing a brief analysis that Annabel never voted or proposed (taking Maud's word for it) and everything else e did involved currencies which were repealed at crisis time. Point being, it didn't break the proposal system so you could jump straight to #3. The whole concept was swirling in the gratuitous arguments. I don't think a single actual CFJ was called out of the mess (maybe because of possible CotC ID crises, or did I miss one?) so the whole thing came down to whose gratuitous arguments were listened to the most. This idea was one that I really liked (don't remember who first suggested it) but it was pretty much ignored in favor of those who jumped right to #2 being needed... we didn't have a strong set of precedents on clear communication back then, anyway. Still, #3 would have made the camps believing in #1 happy so it's ok. :) -Goethe
