On 6/19/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ian Kelly wrote:
> Agora hereby submits to Agora as its benevolent protector.
I don't think that's enough to make Agora qualify to be a protectorate:
it also needs a mechanism for Agora to change Agora's rules arbitrarily,
which the ordinary proposal process probably doesn't count for.
The exact wording is: "It also must allow Agora unrestricted access to
make changes to its ruleset." There's no restriction on what an AI-3
proposal can do (although some changes may require some
bootstrapping), so I don't see why an AI-3 proposal shouldn't be
construed as unrestricted access to make changes.
It would
also be a really bad idea to make Agora a protectorate, because of some
dodgy wording in rule 2147. Applying R2147 to Agora would appear to
make all proposals with AI < 2 ineffective, because the exception for
normal processes of the protectorate isn't broad enough. (In Agora's
normal processes, the ruleset is changed by proposals, not by players.)
The exact wording is:
...this
does not prohibit changes made to a Protectorate nomic by one or
more of its players (or closest equivalent) according to the
rules of that Protectorate.
What are proposals if not the mechanism by which one or more of
Agora's players make changes according to the rules of Agora?
-root
