DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to amend FRContest

[Geoffrey Spear]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Ed Murphy  wrote:
>> 7) If this contract is a Champion's Contest, the contestmaster CAN and
>>    SHALL transfer a medal from the contract to any contestant who has
>>    won 3 rounds of the Committee since the contract came to possess that
>>    medal, as soon as possible after the contestant has won the 3rd such
>>    round.
>
> Having received no objections (AFAIR), I do so.

Was there ever an intent to actually create a Medal?

Re: DIS: Proto: R101 changes

[ais523]

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 15:27 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Semi-related proto-proto: Make all acting on behalf that does not
> violate a R101 right permissible but not legal, with a minor
> infraction for doing so unintentionally without consent, and a serious
> (10+ rest penalty) infraction for willfully doing so without consent.
> Contract then grant consent to act on behalf, not permission.
A player willing to break the rules could then deregister everyone else
by acting on their behalf, then forcing through a proposal giving them
retroactive immunity before the rest of the players could punish them.

Another potential problem: think about my recent actions obo Murphy. I
wasn't intentionally acting obo without consent there (because I still
think that the Points Party scam worked); but I acknowledge that it's
highly controversial whether the scam worked or not, and would expect
several other players to think that my actions there failed. Should that
be given a small or a large penalty? If small, isn't that effectively
rewarding scams that don't work, by letting them have effects anyway?

-- 
ais523