On 11/15/2021 8:48 AM, Trigon via agora-discussion wrote: > El 15/11/2021 a las 15:02, ais523 via agora-discussion escribió: >> On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 16:00 +0100, nethack4.org dicebot via agora- >> business wrote: >> >> Lots of nice short sentences here, so it may well be possible to come >> up with something that works quite well. >> > > Suggestions: > > (1) funny, but may take a lot of upkeep from officers >> When an open device's judge is unassigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any >> eligible player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so in a > >> timely fashion after it becomes an open and unassigned device. > > (2) similar appeal, but less upkeep >> If a device has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge > that >> device CAN assign it to emself without 3 objections. > > either of these could lead to fun CFJs. >
If these are implemented, I wonder if we could make the argument that the device has a whole separate judicial process for determining how it works. I think this could be done in common law - i.e. if something like the above is inserted (either option), an actual CFJ about the device could be judged "DISMISS - ask the device's assigned judge instead" to set the precedent. -G.
