On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 11:51 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > The idea doesn’t seem immediately bad (although I’m not sure I prefer it > > either) but I think such an important area is not suitable for the “write > > something simple and let CFJs figure it out” strategy. > > What's the fun in that? Seriously, if the CFJs don't have a major > impact on the future of the game, it's just boring. This way is more > fun.
Your proposal wording leaves things pretty similar to how Lindrum pulled off Lindrum World - by declaring that, since the game as a whole had an impact on the minor matter in eir jurisdiction, a request to resolve a minor matter (i.e. in an official capacity) could be extended to a ruling on the whole game - e.g. "since Regulated Actions impact my report, I have domain on whether any regulated actions succeed." At the very, very least, there has to be a process during the Notice period for halting/stopping the memorandum from taking effect. But once you've got that, this becomes (effectively) ratification without N objections or without a judge's objection (whatever the threshold). After all, we could model this entirely under the current ruleset by just agreeing that "we don't object to an Officer ratifying a "false" report if they give a good reason, and we'll call that reason a memorandum". To make it truly "administrative law" level of interesting (did I just type that oxymoron) we need something like precedent to be coded - e.g. that judges defer to officers, or that memoranda are part of a record of precedent (that might get reset), etc. Just a little more than the bare minimum, but enough to give some direction to how this can play out. -G.
