This still doesn’t help—there’s other ways to do what I think you’re trying to do that this won’t help.

sheesh!

To scam this part of the rules really seems against the spirit of things. If we’re going to tighten things up here, we might as well do it everywhere… So I’d rather just trust people to behave and not scam obnoxiously.

Any tightening of the rules is a good move, even if it doesn’t remove all the loopholes in one go.

Also, I’d have no complaints if anybody was to use a loophole that hadn’t been closed - I’d say it was fair game in Nomic.

I agree with Isolde here, but tightening rules can’t hurt.

CoV.  Post-careful examination of the ruleset, this is actually quite important.

Still don’t like the grammar—I likely will post a revision to the CfJ rule in its entirety soon.

“Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”  Exodus 22:21

I see better now how this is an ambiguity worth clearing up. I suppose adding the word failed extends the rule to CfJs failed by any means.