Jonathan Van Matre on 8 Jan 2002 18:20:51 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Revision of 236/1 _My Gavel Up Your Ass_

> The whole idea of the "force of law" thing is a Bad Idea. I think I've
> probably demonstrated that. The usual way (I think based on Suber) of
> defining a CFJ  is just to have it guide "game custom", a
> deliberately-nebulous term (still defined to some extent). 
> It's a lot less
> open to abuse. 

Force of law works for the U.S. Supreme Court.  Game custom is just as
easily abused as force of law.  

Under a game custom system, I'm free to be a rogue player, flouting
custom at whim.  CFJs become a useless tool, and no one will use them.
All changes that anyone wants to have the force of law will have to be
made via proposals to change the law.  

If we want to be a legislature-only game, that's certainly one available
option.  But legislative and judicial branches with checks and balances
between them have been known to work every once in a while.  I can't
really speak to their prevalence in Nomics, due to a limited sample size
in my own experience with Nomics, but the notion has enjoyed a modicum
of popularity in human systems of government.

As for an appeal process, one could use the CFJR that way, with the
understanding that you'd probably be getting the same judge.  Beyond
that, since rules supersede CFJs under the system I've proposed, what I
envisioned as the next step for appeal is to create a proposal that
implements the decision you wanted as a rule, and convince a majority of
your peers to agree.  I think that's probably sufficient, but if someone
wants to suggest another method of handling appeals, feel free.