On 7/21/2020 11:33 AM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > On 2020-07-21 12:41 a.m., N. S. via agora-business wrote: >> CFJ:after greg registered, there was one more player than there was before. > > As Registrar, I'm assuming the sender of these emails is not an organism > and therefore not a person. > > I think this would also mean G.'s finger-pointing was INEFFECTIVE so the > Referee NEED NOT respond to it.
H. Referee Publius, I respectfully petition you to respond to the finger-pointing in some manner with an explanation of your choice to resolve the finger-pointing or not, in reference to the below arguments. I don't think the finger-pointing can be so readily dismissed (and knew it was 99% likely a bot when I pointed the finger). We've accepted in the past that if a person does a script to make announcements or the like, even with "randomness", that the person behind the job is the "person" involved. It's possible that the person behind this would be reasonably known as "greg" as an alias as result of this, and the resulting finger-pointing would be good. E.g. if this fake were done "by hand" (no randomness/machine learning involved) and it turned out a current player was behind it, we might say "well you've given us another alias for you (Greg), the registration failed, and you're still guilty of no faking". Why should adding randomness change that view? There's some various reasons/arguments this would fail but I think it needs more examination in that respect. -G.
