I’m generally against mechanisms that are in theory based on violations of the rules but have no actual connection to the “actual” gamestate; In my opinion it should be IMPOSSIBLE to card someone who has not violated a SHALL. If we did that, CFJ judgement would simply happen via CFJ (and there’s no delay; if nobody complains, we can just assume the card happened and is valid).
(By the way: my feelings about the Pledge rework are similar.) Gaelan > On Sep 24, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Nicholas Evans <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't think i feel as strongly as CB but I do feel similarly. Both issues > would be fixed with a) decentralizing (my prefered format is similar to a > CFJ: separate the finger pointer, referee, and judge) cards and b) allowing > forgiveness without apology (perhaps as Agoran Consent). To make up for the > delay a would cause, we could make cards revoke wins that happened after the > cardable event but before the conclusion. > > On Sep 24, 2017 5:26 PM, "Cuddle Beam" <cuddleb...@gmail.com > <mailto:cuddleb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Would make tactical card-flinging (tactically exaggerating other people's > wrong-doings for example) a thing and I feel very queasy about giving our > subjective things that kind of power. > > >Until e publishes such an apology, as a penalty, the bad sport is > >disqualified from winning, > > I'm also very against near-compulsory apologizing, this is like holy shit wtf > tier stuff for me. > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:09 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu > <mailto:ke...@u.washington.edu>> wrote: > > > Proto: "losing conditions" > > [Right now, it's probably worth it to break the rules to win, because wins > are far more tangible and lasting than cards. Let's change the equation...] > > > Amend Rule 2449 (Winning the Game) by replacing: > When the Rules state that a person or persons win the game, > those persons win the game; > with: > When the Rules state that a person or persons win the game, > and those persons are not Disqualified from winning as > described by the Rules, those persons win the game; > > > Amend the Rule titled "Such is Karma" by appending: > Etas are disqualified from winning. > > > Amend Rule 2427 (Yellow Cards) by replacing: > Until e publishes such an apology, as a penalty, the bad sport's > voting strength > with: > Until e publishes such an apology, as a penalty, the bad sport > is disqualified from winning, and the bad sport's voting strength > > > Amend Rule 2475 (Red Cards) by replacing: > of the Card is reduced by 2. > with: > of the Card is reduced by 2, and e is disqualified from winning > for 30 days. > > > Amend Rule 2476 (Pink Slips) by appending the following sentence to > the last paragraph: > The bad sport is disqualified from winning for 30 days from the > issuance of the card. > > [Was trying to decide what the right length of time was for Red and > Pink, something between 14-30 I think]. > > [Any other losing conditions?] > > > > >
