On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 08:12:48PM -0700, Deborah Harrell wrote: > Why, if the 'vigilante's' sacrifice is to be "at least" as much as the > 'offender', would a transparent ding get TWO demerits? Wouldn't _one_ > be at least as much? >:o
Wouldn't 2 be at least as much 1? Why make it easy to ding someone, it should be difficult. > An anonymous dinger should certainly have a higher price to 'pay' also > (though I'm not sure that _ten_ dings is fair either). Anyone who is to insecure to give their identity when imposing their will on another should pay a major price. > Anyone who abuses a 'ding' system should censured strongly (banned > from the list for a specified time? Denied the option to ever use the > 'ding' system again?). Why add complication? Just set the price high enough in the first place then you don't need to add addition complication and punishments. > who thinks it's too bad that 'community shunning' rather than an > 'official demerit' hasn't worked Hasn't worked for what? -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
