On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > o: "cool cool, everything is completely fine *cries*" > > I think if that rule were interpreted as written: to ban any action not > explicitly specified, it would break a whole lot of things.
The current case aside, what else would it break? Keep in mind, the ban was explicitly written to "break" places where CAN and SHALL were used without a "by announcement". The proposal that made the rule change explicitly said that was the purpose, and people voted on it, so those things *should* now be broken. But we saw that coming (I think) and other proposals patched many/most of the places that didn't have a 'by announcement' (I think). So, other breakages?
