Zefram wrote: > That would be fraudulent. I'm sorry, that's an absurd assertion. Take the following:
1. As a non-player natural person, I register, and I have a non- Player friend who reads the email list but doesn't play, and I occasionally ask eir opinion on a vote and follow it. 2. As above, but e has access to the email account to post the vote (with my consent) while I'm on vacation. 3. E doesn't have access to the email account, but I don't have time to read the lists, so I ask em to compose voting messages for me which I (consciously) re-send as my votes. 4. As above, but we write a formal contract good in the country that we both live in, that I'll pay em $0.01 for composing said emails. 5. As above, but the contract states that e pays me $1/month for the right to use my "natural" personhood (remember, e's not a player, either). So my question is, why are any of these "fradulent", and why should Agora care? To Agora, all of them are under the control of one natural person who isn't otherwise registered. Do we really need to draw any lines here, and if so, under what Agoran authority or interpretation of law or (to use your phrase) Agoran theory by which this is fraudulent. I'm assuming any of the above activities are performed "quietly", eg., no lies are told, but the truth isn't volunteered, either. -Goethe
