On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 12:16 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:08 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - the existence of a CFJ > > - the success of a deputised action > > - the verdict of a CFJ > > Why deputised actions? They're no different in this regard than any > other official action. > Well, not the actual success of the action, but the fact that the deputisation was legal. One of the problems was that tusho deputised to do something, but later turned out to not have been a player.
Alternatively, we could allow arbitrary persons to deputise, subject to the usual restrictions, rather than restricting it to players; I don't see any security flaw with that. -- ais523
