I think doing karma would take a deeper look at all the SHALLs and
SHOULDs to ask which ones should still be illegal versus left to
karma - a deeper reform. Mean time, this version isn't that much
different than current I'll probably go PRESENT on it.
On Sun, 10 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
Karma is bootleg democracy though imo, but I like both (I believe
popularity is extremely relevant anyway at nomic in general, regardless of
if such a system enables it or not. It's a factor both at Blognomic and
Agora at an informal level, and the informal level governs everything else
imo.)
On
Actually, the word democratization made me think of another approach,
it was called karma, and it worked pretty well most of the
time as a nice social constraint and reward with occasioanal spats of tit for
tat
that were self-limiting, because if the combatants got out of hand, others
would
On 09/10/17 12:41, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> I've always disliked thought police rules, we've had them, but both
> the burden of evidence and bad feeling make them a pain, and trying
> to codify specific forbidden speech leaves loopholes where a scammer
> can skirt the technical punishment while
Proto:
White Card: This card is appropriate for cases of unsportsmanlike contact
where no other card is appropriate. This card can be (and only be) awarded
by announcement which also contains a specification of a number and 3
support. The possessor of this card cannot perform any ruleset-granted
I've always disliked thought police rules, we've had them, but both
the burden of evidence and bad feeling make them a pain, and trying
to codify specific forbidden speech leaves loopholes where a scammer
can skirt the technical punishment while still being just as "bad".
Going along with our
Did you read the entire message?
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 09:43 Cuddle Beam wrote:
> Sorry for the double post but I just got another idea:
>
> What if I made an Agency/Contract that let me be other people's
> talking-proxy? If they deliberately lie, they wouldn't be
Sorry for the double post but I just got another idea:
What if I made an Agency/Contract that let me be other people's
talking-proxy? If they deliberately lie, they wouldn't be infringing "and
it was made with the intent to mislead.", because I wouldn't have "made"
the message with any intent,
Do statements on a-d count?
Do statements that people publish elsewhere, outside of Agora, also count?
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I retract the proposal "Truthfulness", and submit the following.
>
> ---
> Title: Truthfulness v2
Zefram wrote:
I hereby submit the following proposal, titled truthfulness:
{{{
Retitle rule 2149 to Truthfulness, and amend it to read
A person SHALL NOT make a false statement in any public message
while knowing that the statement is false or being reckless as
to its
10 matches
Mail list logo