On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 19:24 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:28 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I submit the following Proposal, "Don't vote for this", AI-3, and > > > AP-pend it: > > > > The created rule wouldn't actually work (for interesting reasons which > > are almost along the line of a scam). That said, that's not something > > I'd like to rely on. > > Yah, that was the safety (at least the reason I have in mind that it won't > work - dunno if it's same as yours). Suppose I could fix it pretty simply...
Is it becoming a thing to write Terrible Proposals but to make sure that they don't work, on the basis that it can be very hard to prevent them passing? (That said, this one only seems to have one safety valve, unless you consider the name. The last time I wrote a Terrible Proposal it had a safety valve /and/ insufficient Power to work.) -- ais523
