09-05-2018, 09:01 PM
McChimp;3172 Wrote:TempestShadow;3170 Wrote:If I'm reading correctly, the given list of punishments is assumed to be non-exhaustive, and can be presumed to be listing general maximum punishments, yes?
The purpose of the given list of punishments is to confirm explicitly that such extreme lengths are available. It follows approximately the same format as the existing subsection Cormac thought I was changing. In reality, the harshness of punishments is specified by a criminal code like the one that's also on the table at the moment.
I cannot imagine any IC offence so great that those given would prove insufficient.
I wasn't suggesting that we have greater punishments, I just wanted to be sure that was the intention (what you basically said) of the stuff as written.