On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 03:06 -0400, Tanner Swett wrote: > Proposal, AI 3, "We don't need that" > > Amend Rule 1551 "Ratification" to read: > > If an erroneous statement is made in an official report, and the error > is not publicly noted within 30 days, and the erroneous statement is > consistent with the rest of the report, then the gamestate changes to > what it would be if the erroneous statement had been true at the time > of the report.
You're missing the important "purport" distinction here. If someone isn't the ADoP, e can't post the ADoP's report (except via deputisation). If e /thinks/ e's the ADoP, e'll probably place themself as the ADoP on the report, and everyone will believe e's the ADoP, but e won't actually be, and nothing will ratify this (because there are no ADoP reports). This is likely to lead to a cascading failure in the identity of other offices (probably as soon as the next election happens), and eventually the entire gamestate. Another thing that seriously worries me is the number of potential errors that don't involve erroneous statements (e.g. omitting a player from a list of players in the Registrar's report). Finally, you need terminology other than "report", due to things like Assessor assessments of proposal votes. (Also, this re-opens the door to several scams which have been attempted in the past, in some cases successfully, and which the current ruleset wording is designed to avoid.) -- ais523
