Re: [s-d] [s-b] panic

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

comex wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Charles Schaefer
> <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> No one actually thinks I have seriously bound anyone to anything. Even I
>> know that SCAM is nonsense. I just wanted to see if I could pull a fast one
>> on you guys. If Agorans actually got into an argument over something like
>> SCAM, that's just another reason why B Nomic is better. :-)
> 
> http://www.nomic.net/~nomicwiki/index.php/MousetrapThesis

tl,dr:  Here's why the Mousetrap got as ugly as it did (according to
Swann's thesis; I didn't join Agora myself till the following year):

  1) It didn't hinge on "any public message counts as consent" (like
     SCAM), but rather on an alleged loophole in the requirement to
     get consent in the first place (like CPA).

  2) And it attempted to prevent a rival from becoming Notary (equiv.
     of Arbiter).

  3) And its existence wasn't revealed until the rival apparently did
     become Notary.

  4) And its actual text wasn't revealed until even later (the delay
     was accidental, but it looked intentionally ill-intentioned at
     first, esp. since a loophole in the time limit for revealing its
     text was discovered around the same time).
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss