Also, I don't think they were intended to actually mislead players, which is one of the requirements for a faking violation. You could not have thought that anyone was actually going to believe them, so no violation would have occurred.
-Aris On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:53 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > i copied and pasted 3,000 lies, yes. they were the same lie, and i > suppose the cards could have been challenged as such (given messages > are supposed to be taken as a whole for no faking). > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> >> >> Were they all the same lie? If so they may just be one violation in total >> anyway. (by the same principle of saying "I support" on a single intent >> 1000 times is only 1 support). >> >> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote: >>> The violations were just no faking violations, not related to the >>> reeferee's power. >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about >>> > because of this clause: >>> > >>> >> When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over >>> >> an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the >>> >> Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take over the >>> >> investigation and thereby become the investigator. >>> > >>> > It would be amusing if the 3000 violations belatedly came through and >>> > I got to do this. >>> > >>> > It also reveals a hole in the above clause, if the Referee gets to eir >>> > own punishment before the Arbitor, the Referee can conclude the >>> > investigation before the Arbitor can do anything about it... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From V.J. Rada >>> >> > > > > -- > From V.J. Rada
