On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> comex wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> In contrast, ehird appears to be arguing for, and Goethe
>>> against, non-literal interpretation of what had already happened ("X
>>> actually did happen"). That's an accepted part of the culture of some
>>> nomics (e.g. the FRC), but not this one.
>>
>> You mean Goethe for, ehird against?
>
> No, I don't. I may be misunderstanding the nature of the argument,
> though, hence the "appears to be" disclaimer.
I think I'm misunderstanding Murphy's phrasing of the nature of the
argument.
Anyway, the impending death of equity doesn't have to do with Sgeo's
previous judgement (a reasonable one), or this particular judgement (which
wasn't even delivered) but due to struggling against "accepted culture",
a pity as, like I said, some of the contests would be good if Agora-
scamming wasn't making them worthless.
ps. Equity originally took the place of crimes and infractions, You
should probably bring back infractions, etc... it's clear that many many
of the abuses that have been spawned here aren't punishable in a reasonably
small yet suitably deterrent manner.
-Goethe
