On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, comex wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, comex wrote: >>> viii. Every player has the right to deregister; e may continue >>> to accrue obligations and penalties after deregistration >>> but, if e wishes to ignore the game, such penalties shall >>> not unduly harass em. >>> >>> [viii. clarify that so-called "hard deregistration" does not exist-- >>> you keep your rests if you deregister, and might even get more >>> afterward (no "i just caused major illegal harm to the game, now i'll >>> deregister for 90d so i can't be punished"), but it has to stay in the >>> game, no sentence where everyone SHALL annoy the ninny out-of-game for >>> x time.] >> >> It is intresting that you want it to take the opposite meaning than >> its original Suberian sense that a player can incur no penalty worse >> than ceasing to play (in other words, Suber specifically included >> "cease playing to avoid an in-game penalty" as a safety valve). This >> amendment is wholly the opposite of intent. > > Well... I don't think it's the opposite. From the original ruleset: > > 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than > continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than > losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. > > But, on one hand, unlike the original Nomic, we have > criminal courts: whereas intentionally breaking the rules in a game > without a penalty system would be very bad form, even if the player > wanted to quit, violating obligations in Agora generally just results > in more obligations and/or in-game penalties.
Perhaps this helps us get to the nub of the matter. In an ongoing context, the game has become more like a society than a game. In that sense, exile (voluntary or otherwise) is in itself a strong punishment and "in game" penalties may still matter to non-players especially since the line between what is and isn't "in game" can change. As you invoke the criminal courts, I'll point out that applying punishment to the unregistered is essentially trying a person in absentia when they don't necessarily have the full defensive abilities of players- that's not a hallmark of comfortable societies and enshrining the ability makes a mockery of what a "Right" is. Please don't be insulting and call the ability to punish people who leave the game any kind of "right". Some time ago (2002? 2003?) I was moustrapped out of Agora for a full 2 months by the "frozen players" debacle and want to avoid it. Note that I don't feel this way about purely contractual obligations. -G.
