quazie wrote: >and proposal A creates a rule that allows player B to write proposal C >and proposal C "seriously hinders the adoption of Democratic proposals" >couldn't it be argued that proposal A was also the culprit?
I'd say in that case proposal C is the culprit. > In either >of these situations would the speaker have violated a rule if e did not >realize that was happening? No. The magic words are "in eir estimation". If the Speaker innocently misses a bad proposal then that's just the game's bad fortune. I expect in any likely case people would discuss a suspect proposal, so the Speaker would almost certainly be aware of any controversy. The only way to violate the rule would be if a Speaker had serious suspicion that a proposal was going to have a bad effect and e nevertheless omitted to veto it. It's not particularly onerous. -zefram
