On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote:
> Proposal “Discussion Redirection” with AI 3 {
> Create the rule “Discussion Redirection” with Power 1 {
> If a message is sent to a Discussion forum that is clearly intended to
> be sent to a Public forum, it SHALL be treated as if it were sent to a Public
> forum. Players SHOULD NOT send message intended for Public forums to
> Discussion forums.
If such a policy were to be enacted, there would then be no point in
having separate public and discussion fora in the first place - you
could just flip agora-discussion to Public.
Also, the wording is buggy. The rule 'Mother, May I?' gives all-caps
terms more strict definitions than in standard English, and the
meaning of "SHALL" is:
7. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the
described action violates the rule in question.
Therefore, the clause as written would most likely be interpreted as
requiring players to *pretend* that the relevant messages were sent to
public fora, without affecting the actual platonic validity of any
actions in them. (And such a requirement would likely fall afoul of
the freedom-of-speech clause in Rule 478.)
> If the above rule would not function properly with a power of 1, change
> its power to 2.
> If the above rule would not function properly with a power of 2, change
> its power to 3.
With corrected wording, it could only really work (as expected,
anyway) by taking precedence over Rule 478's definition of "public
message", which requires power 3 and most likely an explicit statement
of precedence, but it would be better to just put the clause in that
rule - that is, if for some reason the flip-to-public approach would
be unsuitable.
