On 6/4/2020 8:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 11:43 AM Rebecca wrote: >> >> Blots are about to be significantly harder to remove, and the general >> Agoran expectation is that certain crime is pretty much constant and >> usually no big deal (mainly slightly late officer reports, perhaps things >> like trivial faking). Why don't we reflect that in our rules? >> >> I create the following proposal >> Title: Slap on the wrist >> AI: 2 >> Chamber: Justice >> Text: Amend rule 2555 "Blots" by replacing the text "To levy a fine of N >> on a person, where N is a positive integer, is to grant em N blots." with >> the text "To levy a fine of N on a person, where N is a positive integer or >> zero, is to grant em N blots" >> -- >> From R. Lee > > I'm happy to have this discretion to use, but I also wonder whether it > wouldn't be better to either remove the minimum of 3 for expungement > with apologies or allow apologies to be considered when determining > the fine's amount. >
One trouble with the Referee Carding system was that everyone got green cards - given the option of "issuing a warning", it became sort of like our current discussion of Honour - issuing something above a green card could be seen as a major rebuke instead of a minor slap, and cause hurt feelings. So in writing the Levy a Fine languauge we purposefully left fines of 0 blots off the table and went for the "impose the fine but make it forgivable" option instead. I've thought about bringing 0 fines back a few times when obvious (minor) injustices happen, but hopefully with a standard written, such that 0 is the exception rather than the rule? -G.
