Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: The Oracle is Wise

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Alex Smith <ais523@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 21:13 -0500, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> > PS: My personal platform on running the MoQ = assign consultations to
> > priests in a largely random manner except where one of the above points
> > strongly calls for manual intervention. In addition, I intend to punish
> > supplicants who fail to correctly use the Unbeliever mechanism by
> assigning
> > consultations to the priest who blatantly should have been unbeliever
> where
> > none was named.]]
> Murphy tends to assign at random at Agora, not avoiding blatant
> should-have-been-named-as-barred for much the same reasons. comex
> scammed it by calling the CFJ (=Oracularity) on a comex/me scam himself,
> thus giving a reasonable chance of the CFJ being assigned to me (which
> actually happened). A pair of Scamsters in B could scam this particular
> policy even more effectively, pretty much guaranteeing that one of them
> ends up judging the resulting oracularities


Hmmm I'm not sure I get what happened in the case you're referring to. If I
understand correctly, I don't think that's a problem with my policy. "Manual
intervention" includes, of course, choosing not to assign consultations to
co-conspirators of scamsters. Which would exclude you as Priest in the
comex/ais523 scam.

Do you mean, though, that you and comex might put on a show for everyone,
having a "fight" after which one of you CFJs without naming the other as
unbeliever, thereby tricking me into naming the other as a Priest who
against expectation, turns out to be sympathetic??? If so, then yeah, I
should use random assignment a little more often.

BP
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss