On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: > II = 3
I doubt it. > > Amend Rule 106 (Adopting Proposals) by replacing this text: > > A proposal is a fixed body of text which has been made into a > proposal using a process specifically described in the Rules. > When creating proposals, the person who creates them SHOULD > ensure that the proposal outlines changes to be made to Agora, > such as enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other > explicit changes to the gamestate. When a proposal that includes > such explicit changes takes effect, it applies those changes to > the gamestate. If the proposal cannot make some such changes, > this does not preclude the other changes from taking place. > > with this text: > > A proposal is a fixed body of text which has been made into a > proposal using a process specifically described in the Rules. > When a person creates a proposal, e SHOULD ensure that it > specifies one or more changes to the gamestate. Where permitted > by other rules, a proposal that takes effect generally can, as > part of its effect, apply the changes that it specifies. If the > proposal cannot make some such changes, this does not preclude > the other changes from taking place. I'd go with "unless forbidden by other rules"; requiring the rules to specifically allow proposals to make each possible modification to the gamestate seems kind of annoying, and will just force the creation of way too many temporary rules.
