On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes >> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime >> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all >> along. >> >> >> >> > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play > but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the > game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is > very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. >
Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all. Exile should be wholly reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be playing for a while". In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty. If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs. For example: given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow, it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions. -G.
