On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 19:04, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2918 > > ============== Criminal Case 2918 (Interest Index = 0) =============== > > scshunt violated Rule 2283, committing the Class-2 Crime of > Assaulting the Batteries, by publishing the above quoted > message. > > ======================================================================== > > Caller: Yally > Barred: scshunt > > Judge: omd > Judgement: GUILTY/DISCHARGE > > ======================================================================== > > History: > > Called by Yally: 06 Dec 2010 21:36:02 GMT > Defendant scshunt informed: 06 Dec 2010 21:36:02 GMT > Assigned to omd: 12 Dec 2010 23:27:42 GMT > Judged GUILTY/DISCHARGE by omd: 14 Dec 2010 05:27:04 GMT > > ======================================================================== > > Caller's Arguments: > > scshunt clearly took this action with malicious intent, as > e attempted to spend 12 ergs all at once when eir weekly income was > only 4. > > ======================================================================== > > Caller's Evidence: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 16:25, Sean Hunt <scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> > wrote: > > On 10-11-30 07:35 PM, omd wrote: > >> > >> I assume Promotor, perform the following distribution, then resign > >> Promotor: > >> > >> This distribution of proposals 6908-6913 initiates the Agoran > >> Decisions on whether to adopt them. The eligible voters are the > >> active players at the time of this distribution, and the vote > >> collector is the Assessor. The valid options on each decision are FOR > >> and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote). Each proposal is hereby > >> assigned the corresponding ID number listed with it. > >> > >> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE > >> 6908 O 1 2.0 G Pay To Sit > >> 6909 O 1 3.0 scshunt Carrot Juice > >> 6910 O 1 3.0 omd Forgery is Forgery > >> 6911 O 1 1.0 Murphy Fear cleanup > >> 6912 O 0 1.0 Murphy Restore the terrible choice > >> 6913 O 1 1.0 omd Dictatorship > > > > I pay a fee to increase my voting limit by 4 on each of these, then I > change > > my votes on each of these to FOR > > > > -scshunt > > ======================================================================== > > Judge omd's Arguments: > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Sean Hunt <scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> > wrote: > > I had misinterpreted the rules and for some reason thought I could do > that > > to all of the proposals simultaneously for a charge of only 2 ergs. > > Eh... but precedent holds that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. > (The wording changed but not enough to affect this AFAICS.) > > However, since this was in fact an misinterpretation rather than a > blatantly illegal action, I find that the clause about DISCHARGE being > appropriate applies here. I judge CFJ 2918 GUILTY/DISCHARGE. > > ======================================================================== > I intend, with two support, to appeal this case's question on sentencing. The DISCHARGE clause seems to apply when players exceed the number of ergs they have because they do not know how many they have, which is reasonable given that the PSM's report is only published once per week at the most. The clause is probably not supposed to apply to other ignorance of the rules, an which committed in different ways would result in punishments.
