On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 16:43, Ed Murphy<emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: > BobTHJ wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 16:15, Ed Murphy<emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >>> BobTHJ wrote: >>> >>>> The "with N support" mechanism for NOVs is very messy. This proposes >>>> to replace that with a simple "with support". It also removes the >>> This would allow the CotC or Justiciar to launch a successful >>> five-lights scam with just one other conspirator. >>> >> True, but the problem with the 5-lights scam was not the NOV >> publication. It was the ability to publish, contest, CFJ, and sentence >> all in the same message. The with N support 'fix' for NOV publication >> attacked the wrong problem. > > The real problem is that a sentence of SILENCE imposes Rests > immediately; imposing delays earlier in the process wouldn't stop the > C-or-J and eir confederate from (a) submitting sufficiently many NOVs > and (b) sentencing and activity-juggling all in the same message. > > One possibility is to allow only (say) five sentences of SILENCE to > take effect per day, delaying additional sentences in 1-day increments. > Why not just wait to impose rests until the judgment is un-appealable?
BobTHJ
