On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Sean Hunt <ride...@gmail.com> wrote: > Geoffrey Spear wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> >> wrote: >>> >>> Ultimately, what we're dealing with is, if a person does take an >>> absolute dictatorship, and e makes too many changes, then players who >>> are strongly pro-democratic may leave, and having a dictatorship >>> with no players is rather hollow. >> >> The whole dictatorship relies specifically on having no other players; >> it works by deregistering everyone. I suspect there are enough players >> who'd be angry about losing their long continuous registrations that >> e'd be exiled for a long time by bill of attainder once e gave up the >> dictatorship, and no one would play with em if e didn't. > > I'd modify the game state so that continuous registrations, officeholding, > etc. wouldn't be interrupted, but that feels rather hacky and is part of why > I'm loath to pull this directly.
Creating a legal fiction of continuous registration for people who were deregistered would be even dumber than demanding a win because you could get one by doing something blatantly illegal.
