AC -- why would anyone ever have to accept the judgement of the court?

[Sifmole]

So why would they? What entity would enforce the judgements?

[primetime32]

what courts are you referring to?

[Sifmole]

Are you implying there are no courts of law in ACLand?

[acoustix]

This is an illogical question. If you assume there are courts of law, wouldn't you automatically have to assume there would be a system in place to uphold rulings? Use your brain a bit. They obviously wouldn't hand down a sentence and then say "You have to do it because we said so. Promise you'll report to prison tomorrow. Say scout's honor. Say it!!!"

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
This is an illogical question. If you assume there are courts of law, wouldn't you automatically have to assume there would be a system in place to uphold rulings? Use your brain a bit. They obviously wouldn't hand down a sentence and then say "You have to do it because we said so. Promise you'll report to prison tomorrow. Say scout's honor. Say it!!!"

[/ QUOTE ]

I am asking those who understand AC to explain how it works; and by that I mean I want someone to explain what the system looks like that goes in place to enforce the rulings. Not simply that there is one.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I am asking those who understand AC to explain how it works; and by that I mean I want someone to explain what the system looks like that goes in place to enforce the rulings. Not simply that there is one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so arrogant to assume that I can know what the most efficient solution is. You want people that are explicitly opposed to central planning to give you micromanaged maps of how things should progress?

You say this is doging the question, I say you're begging the question. You're basically asking someone that says "your one outer on the river is a 45-to-1 shot" to tell you exactly what the next card will be.

Some related thoughts from some previous posts of mine:

[ QUOTE ]
Letting go of control is a big problem for most people. It's hard to accept that micromanagement is counterproductive, especially for people that have built their careers around the concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This reminded me of something:

[ QUOTE ]
In the pursuit of learning, every day somehting is acquired.
In the pursuit of Tao, every day something is dropped.
Less and less is done
Until non-action is achieved.
When nothing is done, nothing is left undone.

The world is ruled by letting things take their course.
It can not be ruled by interfering

[/ QUOTE ]

--- Lao Tsu, Tao Te Ching, Chapter Forty-Eight

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever you advise a ruler in the way of Tao, Counsel him not to use force to conquer the universe.
For this would only casue resistance.
Thorn bushes spring up wherever the army has passed.
Lean years follow in the wake of a great war.
Just do what needs to be done
Never take advantage of power.

Achieve results,
But never glory in them.
Achieve results,
But never boast.
Achieve results,
Because this is the natural way.
Achieve results,
But not through violence.

Force is followed by loss of strength.
This is not the way of Tao.
That which goes against the Tao
comes to an early end.

[/ QUOTE ]

--- Chapter Thirty

[ QUOTE ]
The softest thing in the universe
Overcomes the hardest thing in the universe, That without substance can enter where there is no room.
Hence I know the value of non-action.

Teaching without words and work without doing Are understood by very few.

[/ QUOTE ]

--- Chapter Fourty-Three

The other chapters ain't too bad, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
You're basically asking someone that says "your one outer on the river is a 45-to-1 shot" to tell you exactly what the next card will be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Er, no.

He's asking if he has any recourse should the 'one outer' not come in and his gamboler (sp?) opponent refuse to pay up.

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am asking those who understand AC to explain how it works; and by that I mean I want someone to explain what the system looks like that goes in place to enforce the rulings. Not simply that there is one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so arrogant to assume that I can know what the most efficient solution is. You want people that are explicitly opposed to central planning to give you micromanaged maps of how things should progress?

You say this is doging the question, I say you're begging the question. You're basically asking someone that says "your one outer on the river is a 45-to-1 shot" to tell you exactly what the next card will be.

Some related thoughts from some previous posts of mine:

[ QUOTE ]
Letting go of control is a big problem for most people. It's hard to accept that micromanagement is counterproductive, especially for people that have built their careers around the concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

My problem is this -- real life is about details. Real life is about what happens when ideaology meets friction. The ACers present that AC solves the problems of a beuracracy based govt. The thing is the beuracracy of govt came about exactly because idealogies fail in practice. I want any ACer to stop saying, "Oh who knows but someone will figure it out", because the thing is this: others have already figured it out -- and you get a centralized govt as the solution. What is there in AC that is really any different? AC is a 500,000 ft view of a problem -- and well sure almost anything looks good at that level. Tackle the details, tackle the edges then maybe it will be impressive and reasonable.

[ctj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an illogical question. If you assume there are courts of law, wouldn't you automatically have to assume there would be a system in place to uphold rulings? Use your brain a bit. They obviously wouldn't hand down a sentence and then say "You have to do it because we said so. Promise you'll report to prison tomorrow. Say scout's honor. Say it!!!"

[/ QUOTE ]

I am asking those who understand AC to explain how it works; and by that I mean I want someone to explain what the system looks like that goes in place to enforce the rulings. Not simply that there is one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's one scenario (from "Maske: Thaery" by Jack Vance):

..."Sir, we proceed along conventional lines . I am known as 'Scales'. My colleague may be addressed as 'Balance'. We are officers of the 'Faithful Retribution Company. We carry a proper warrant, signed and officially stamped, for a 'Well-Merited Extreme' to be applied to your person at this moment."

Jubal spoke ... as he tried to hold firm. "Let me see the warrant".

Balance produced a sheet of parchment; Jubal took it into his room. Scales attempted to follow; Jubal roughly shoved him back. Balance, however, inserted his foot in the door.

Jubal read the document. His offense was defined as "wanton, unreasonable, cruel and unverifiable slander, rendered against the reputation of the Excellent Ramus Ymph". ...

"And what is this 'Extreme Penaly'?" asked Jubal through the door.

"We must infuse you with hyperas," explained Scales. "This is a hyperaesthesic agent and a glottal inhibitor. Then we bathe you for twenty minutes in herndyche, a dermal irritant; then we make thirteen applications of the bonebreaker upon your limbs. Your penalty thereupon is fulfilled."

"I contest and appeal the penalty." declared Jubal. "The arbitrator will strike down this warrant; so take your foot from the door."

"All formalities have already been accomplished in your name. Notice, at the bottom of the page, where the arbitrator has rendered his findings."

... "The arbitrator is an Ymph! He is related to Ramus Ymph!" croaked Jubal.

"That matter lies beyond our instructions. Now, Sir Droad, allow us to enter your room."

"Never. Stand back or I'll kill you."

Scales spoke in a harsh rasping monotone: "Most unwise, even to talk so, Sir Droad. We are simple men, bent only on our duty".


-- C.T. Jackson

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
What entity would enforce the judgements?

[/ QUOTE ]
An enforcing entity...