Interesting question.
I'd say it does have the potential to break things, but that it's a known feature. i.e. if we put something broken in a Rule via a proposal, then we'd have to say "it's our fault, we shouldn't have voted for it." It's really the same (only) protection against bad proposals. In other words, it doesn't seem any more dangerous than rule changes of the same power? On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > On Sep 20, 2017, at 2:38 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > > > Without addressing the question of whether a proposal can have direct > > effects on other proposals without enacting a rule change (a complicated > > question under rule 2140), it seems clear that a proposal can have effects > > beyond rule changes, and that those effects could include effects on the > > proposal itself. > > I slept on this, and I’m concerned that this may have been a more dangerous > precedent than I originally considered. I’m going to let it stand unless > someone else feels I should reconsider, but it might be worth contemplating > what the effects of an adopted proposal similar to > > ----- > The clauses of this proposal take effect simultaneously, in one indivisible > step. > > The following clause has no effect. > > The previous clause has no effect. > ----- > > would be. > > -o > >
