c. wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Roger Hicks<pidge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> True, but the problem with the 5-lights scam was not the NOV
>> publication. It was the ability to publish, contest, CFJ, and sentence
>> all in the same message. The with N support 'fix' for NOV publication
>> attacked the wrong problem.
>
> There are two problems, both of which are required for the five lights scam:
> - Incorrect NoVs are legal to publish
> - GUILTY immediately creates rests, rather than waiting out the appeal
> deadline
>
> The first "problem" didn't actually exist at the time of the scam, but
> ais523 thought it did. The second remains a problem.
The first should IMO still be clarified, e.g. replacing the relevant
paragraph of Rule 2230 with
Knowingly issuing a Notice of Violation with a false allegation
(i.e. the Accused did not violate any Rule via the specified
action/inaction) is ILLEGAL, and the Class-4 Crime of Libel.
Knowingly issuing a Notice of Violation with other incorrect
information is ILLEGAL, and the Class-3 Crime of Sloppy Ticketing
(2 if the errors are limited to omissions).
The second part would cover NoVs specifying the wrong rule, or the
wrong Class/Power for the rule.
