On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Sean Hunt wrote:
> >> I thought quite closely about the Prerogative of Prejudice. I wanted
> >> something cool and powerful, but not entirely absurd. My rationale is
> >> that Prejudice is not truly a just punishment, and should not be
> >> considered a judicial resolution to controversy per R101.
> >
> > I'm reading Prejudice through a few times and may have some comments; but
> > I agree, I'm not so concerned about criminal mechanics - even "unfair"
> > ones if they're basically playable - as I would be about R101 (inquiry)
> > cases. So that's all good.
>
> Sorry, I'd forgotten that there was another R101 right in play, and
> that is "Every person has the right to cause formal reconsideration of
> any judicial determination that e should be punished." Prejudice could
> bump up against it, but hopefully it would be interpreted as not truly
> being judicial (although it is clearly Judicial ;) ).
It's been pointed out that "formal reconsideration" could easily mean
"Have Mercy, Sire!"
