DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Kerim Aydin
V.J. Rada > Text: Repeal rule 2125 "Regulated Actions" Jason Cobb wrote: > Simply striking the last sentence of the Rule would suffice... I think we'd always like to have some sort of protection against regulating breathing and the like. Grabbed some old language from the Rights era, maybe we

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Jason Cobb
I think that might fall victim to the same thing I tried with CFJ 3737. When we have contracts, any player can get the Rules to prohibit anything (at least for certain players), thus removing the protections. So, when I create a contract that prohibits breathing, breathing would be indirectly "

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 6/16/2019 5:43 PM, Jason Cobb wrote: > On 6/16/19 8:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> V.J. Rada >> > Text: Repeal rule 2125 "Regulated Actions" >> >> Jason Cobb wrote: >> > Simply striking the last sentence of the Rule would suffice... >> >> I think we'd always like to have some sort of protect

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Rebecca
Anyone dumb enough to consent to a contract forbidding breathing deserves any blots that may be imposed, in my view. No such protections are needed, and if somehow somebody scams someone into such a contract, the referee can use eir discretion to not punish. I stand by my original stance/ On Mon,

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Jason Cobb
Maybe a model like this would work: - _Each_ requirement-creating entity (including both the Rules at large, each contract, regulations, etc.) has its own set of "regulated actions", and cannot be interpreted to say anything about actions outside of this set. This would keep the stipulation th

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 6/16/2019 6:10 PM, Rebecca wrote: Anyone dumb enough to consent to a contract forbidding breathing deserves any blots that may be imposed, in my view. No such protections are needed, and if somehow somebody scams someone into such a contract, the referee can use eir discretion to not punish.

Re: DIS: unregulation

2019-06-16 Thread Rebecca
The regulated action would be breaching a contract you consented to, which is unlawful under the rules. It wouldn't matter what was in the contract. I think any reasonable human judge would rule as such. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On 6/16/2019 6:10 PM, Rebecca wrote: