On Sun, 2026-04-26 at 21:48 +0200, Cosmo via agora-official wrote:
> ID 9336
> Counter-revolution (AI=2.0)
> 
[...]
>
> Repeal any rule that includes "Janet" or "ais523" in its body (case 
> insensitive)

CFJ: If proposal 9336 is enacted at a time when there are two rules it
could repeal that each contain "Janet" or "ais523" in their body,
neither of them are repealed.

Arguments: It's been a very long-standing principle of Agora that a
proposal that attempts to make multiple simultaneous rules changes
instead makes no changes, especially in the case of trying to repeal
multiple pages at once. This is useful for catching breakage in cases
where a proposal would accidentally repeal too much or break the game
(and I vaguely remember it has been historically useful in that
respect, especially before rule 1698 was given power 4).

As such, game custom is to say something like "in numerical order" when
intentionally repealing multiple rules at once (although that might not
help in this particular case – if I'm tracking the gamestate correctly,
there are currently two such rules and neither has a number yet). Not
doing that would historically have unambiguously failed.

The rules for rule changes have however been relaxed recently, so it's
not clear that the precedent still applies. (Under "best interests of
the game" reasoning, I hope that it still applies! Having unordered
rules changes could potentially cause problems with precedence, and
it's been a useful safety valve in the past.)

(Note: there are other reasons why these proposals aren't particularly
effective at stopping the dictatorship – I can think of at least two
easy ways that Janet and I could prevent them having the desired effect
and there are likely more – so I'd appreciate an honest judgement
rather than a counter-scamming one.)

-- 
ais523

Reply via email to