Re: DIS: "Class-N Crime" or "Class N Crime"

2019-07-02 Thread Rebecca
This would be a good candidate for a cleanup. I think the dash is more
correct as its an adjectival phrase as it were?

On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 8:51 AM Jason Cobb  wrote:

> Just to be stylistically consistent, which one should I prefer? The
> Rules use both, although "Class N" is more common than "Class-N".
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
>

-- 
>From R. Lee


Re: DIS: Class N crime

2017-06-09 Thread Kerim Aydin


On Fri, 9 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 22:02 +, Quazie wrote:
> > Wow - The rulesset is a bit of a mess, we should remove instances of
> > Class N crimes as they don't mean anything.
> 
> CFJs in the past, after the undefinition of "class N crime", have found
> that specifying something as a crime makes it illegal, and higher
> classes should encourage higher punishments. In other words, pretty
> much what it meant back when it was defined, just less precise.

Just for reference, it was originally calibrated such that, if something
was just ILLEGAL, it was by default a Class P crime where P was the power
of the Rule.  Adding the explicit Class was if you wanted to make
something more (or less) serious than the power of the rule implied.





Re: DIS: Class N crime

2017-06-09 Thread Aris Merchant
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 22:02 +, Quazie wrote:
>> Wow - The rulesset is a bit of a mess, we should remove instances of
>> Class N crimes as they don't mean anything.
>
> CFJs in the past, after the undefinition of "class N crime", have found
> that specifying something as a crime makes it illegal, and higher
> classes should encourage higher punishments. In other words, pretty
> much what it meant back when it was defined, just less precise.

I agree. I also note that keeping those definitions will make it
easier to bring back a criminal judicial system, which we're planing
to do soon anyway.

-Aris


Re: DIS: Class N crime

2017-06-09 Thread Alex Smith
On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 22:02 +, Quazie wrote:
> Wow - The rulesset is a bit of a mess, we should remove instances of
> Class N crimes as they don't mean anything.

CFJs in the past, after the undefinition of "class N crime", have found
that specifying something as a crime makes it illegal, and higher
classes should encourage higher punishments. In other words, pretty
much what it meant back when it was defined, just less precise.

-- 
ais523