Benjamin Schultz wrote: >Would it be as effective, and without the power inflation, to have >R1482 state that it takes precedence over all other rules?
Actually R1482 now wouldn't allow such an amendment in straightforward form, but you can get round that with a bit of fiddling. Now, if it's to take precedence over all other rules then that includes precedence over rules of the same power as it, so it's no longer only what the title says. R1030 would have to be modified accordingly, to avoid treading on its toes. Bit messy, but you could get it to stipulate a consistent precedence structure. It's still not effective, though, because a Power>=3 rule can still amend R1482 to impose its own precedence. To prevent that you'd have to modify R105 to make a special exception for R1482. And another exception for itself, of course. Or beef up the second paragraph to ban modification by rules, but then a Power>=3 rule can still get in through the proposal mechanism or by defining another class of instrument. Basically no. Short of making R1482 absolutely unmodifiable, which would be difficult to make watertight and would arguably disqualify Agora from being a nomic, it can't be made effective for application to rules of power equal to or greater than its own. -zefram
