RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: No Kickbacks (Ju stice, Administered Piecemeal)

[Eric Gerlach <egerlach@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 01:23 PM 2002-01-15 +0000, you wrote:
> > >If the CFJ system allows us to call for effects of any kind, then this
> > >won't work. It's therefore probably a bad idea to put this in, as it
> might
> > >give us an illusion of security, and encourage us to allow CFJs to change
>
> > >things. Which is a Bad Thing.
> >
> > Is it???  What happens if someone takes an action which is illegal?  Even
> > if someone makes a CFJ, if the CFJ cannot change anything, and the person
> > has gotten away scot-free with their illegality!
> >
> Well... no. If someone *attempts* to take an action which is illegal, it
> doesn't work (although more on this later). A CFJ doesn't need to *change*
> anything to prevent it from happening, because it never happened in the
> first place; a CFJ just establishes whether it was legal or not.

Okay, you're absolutely right on that.  Perhaps rephrasing it like this 
will make more sense:  We all have a mass hallucination that something 
happened that was against the rules.  So now we wake up from said 
hallucination (via a CFJ); what does the world look like?  It is my belief 
that the ruling on the CFJ should outline what has to be corrected in our 
mental represenatations (and the "official" ones) to bring them in 
accordance with what actually happened.  I think this was the spirit of 
"Judicial Orders", but it was worded in a less-than-optimum 
manner.  Perhaps tonight (if I have time between eating and watching 24) I 
will draft a new judicial reform proposal which addresses this.

>  Of course,
> if someone takes an action that's illegal, and no one notices, then the
> statute of limitations kicks in after a week, and it *becomes* legal.
>
> I don't think the statute of limitations works that well the way it's
> currently written, but that's another story.

I hate to be the civic promoter, but draft a proposal then!  The justice 
system sure ain't perfect the way it is now (as it appears it can 
circumvent rules with no appeal), so we have to fix it somehow.

> > Well, the other option is that
> > we make a penalty for players who disobey the law.
> >
> In most cases, it's impossible to disobey the law; nomic laws aren't like
> legal laws, they're more akin to physical laws (although they have a
> strictly limited domain, as I'll argue in a CFJ I'm currently writing).
> Similarly, CFJs aren't like the adversarial system of criminal justice;
> they're more like an inquest, which attempts to determine what happened (or
> some better example).

Again, 100% correct.

And as a point of personal preference... is the CFJ really the best way to 
go about that?