[Nomic] Arbitration

[Adam Biltcliffe]

On Sep 22 2004, Jonathan David Amery wrote:

>  We need a system for resolving disputes about the state of play.

I concur.

> What sort of thing would people like?  Arbitrary dictatorship;
> randomly selected judge; algorithmically selected judge;
> referendum...?

I'm not particularly in favour of arbitrary dictatorship; Imperial Nomic 
looks quite fun, but it isn't the game I was intending to play. I don't 
particularly fancy doing everything by referendum; if we have to vote on 
resolution of ambiguities it feels no different from passing a new rule to 
resolve the issue, plus there's the issue of how the issue is broken down 
into possible standpoints for people to vote on.

I'm in favour of disputes being resolved by a judge, with the option to 
appeal if the judge gets it patently wrong. I'd suggest any player can put 
him/her/it/eirself forward as a potential judge, and that someone have the 
duty of selecting a judge by whatever means from the pool of available 
judges.

Alternatively, we could elect someone as arbitrator for all disputes on a 
weekly or fortnightly basis (or let it be determined by something else, 
such as score), with secondary and tertiary judges to handle appeals or 
rule on issues raised by the primary judge.

adam