Unfortunately, I think the common definition makes it rather clear what’s
going on. It’s definitely 1,000,000,000 actions, according to CFJ 3597, but
I think that CFJ may also suggest that we can only levy one fine (I’m not
sure about that though).

-Aris

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 4:17 PM Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote:

> Oh, please say I can levy 1,000,000,000 fines. That would be awesome.
>
> ...Maybe not for D. Margaux. :/
>
> Incidentally, I just did a brief ruleset skim for something that might
> indicate whether this was 1 action or 1,000,000,000, and uncovered a
> different issue: I can't find any definition of "award" for assets. The
> official verb in R2577 is "grant". Are we sure that "awarding" favours
> actually does anything at all?
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Monday, January 21, 2019 12:05 AM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Winning by flagrant rule violations is generally thought to be uncouth.
> I’m
> > not sure the Agoran public will be inclined to let you keep the win. I
> > would also like to point out that, technically, each favor gained may be
> a
> > seperate rule violation, depending on how exactly the relevant provisions
> > are written. The penalties incurred could be quite substantial.
> >
> > I intend to impeach the Arbitor with 2 Agoran Consent.
> >
> > -Aris
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 4:00 PM D. Margaux dmargaux...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I have 25 balloons. I hereby spend 24 balloons to win the game.
> > > I point my finger at myself for giving out favours in violation of the
> > > rules and I throw myself on the mercy of the court.
> > > I CFJ: “D. Margaux won the game by politics in this message.”
>
>
>

Reply via email to