On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 17:33 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > CFJ 3383 provides strong guidance on interpreting r. 101. Fool > > allegedly violated r. 101 by purporting to deregister all other > > players, and by subsequently locking them out of the game. GUILTY on > > judgement, unresolved on appeal, and apparently still assigned to > > Walker, woggle, and Wooble. (Right Honourable Arbitor, you may wish > > to resolve this.) > > The appeal would have silently ceased to exist at the point where > appeals were repealed from the rules. > > Exactly the same thing happened to the last equity case ever; it had > severe trouble finding a judge, and then the rules for equity cases > were repealed, so it just disappeared. (Equity cases were a method of > ruling on disputes related to the spirit of contracts, contracts being > kind-of similar to Organisations. One of the rules relating to them was > that an equity case couldn't be judged by a contract's member, and some > contracts had a *lot* of members. So finding an appropriate judge could > be very difficult back then, and the contract in question was basically > the main driver of Agora's economy, thus almost everyone was > participating in it.)
Lots of people also permanently Disfavored equity cases because they didn't want to deal with them, that didn't help, so it was painfully hard to find someone interested in judging those cases but not interested in being a member (and I remember that being one reason we ended that particular experiment). Fortunately, I think we repealed R101 before we repealed the appeals process, so we didn't violate Fools right to appeal... :).
