Ian Kelly wrote: >To what rules and behavior are you referring? The rules impose obligations on non-players, which is inconsistent with them being a contract with the players as the set of parties. (An amended version of R2171 that widens the notional set of parties would run into trouble with the application of R101(iv) and R101(v) in such cases.)
The rules don't terminate if there are fewer than two players. It's also an open question whether a non-unanimous voting process for amendment (such as the rules have) is compatible with R1742. -zefram
