On Fri, 1 Jul 2011, Elliott Hird wrote: > On 1 July 2011 00:09, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Except that it's not, because in common law jurisdictions the rulings > > actually have legitimate power, while in Agora you're just allowed to > > possibly consider them in interpreting the rules. > > Yeah, but is that power actually codified anywhere, or just part of > another judgement? We've certainly judged that judgements affect how > everyone "must" interpret the game if they want to be right. :)
It's like house rules in any other game. There's nothing to stop someone from calling the same CFJ over and over again, hoping for the opposite answer. Sometimes people have done that in the past... once or twice. We deal with that by saying "once an answer is given, you should defer to it next time, so there's no point in calling it again and again." Then, just like in house rules, if someone keeps bringing up the same argument, or not deferring, all we can do is "not invite them to play next time" e.g. tell them how annoying they are and hope they decide on the FAGE. Never gotten as far as a true exile/ban, hope it never does. At times here, there have been judicial orders/motions and other types of more official power given to judges, nothing wrong with that we just don't have it right now except maybe victory cases. If someone wanted to truly troll though, judicial power wouldn't stop it. -G.
