Re: DIS: [Proposals] Office and Switch Patches

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I like these in general, but I think that Less Critical Patching
should address what occurs if there is no default value. Currently, I
don't think that switches can lack a value.
On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 7:15 PM Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Title: Office Patch
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G., P.S.S
>
>
> Amend Rule 1006, "Offices", by changing the first sentence to read:
>   Officeholder is an office switch tracked by the ADoP, with possible values
>   of any person or "vacant" (default).
>
> Change the gamestate to whatever it would be if officeholder had been a switch
> for as long as it has been described as such by the rules, with "vacant" as
> its default value.
>
> Make omd the Distributor.
>
>
> Title: Less Critical Patching
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors:
>
> Amend Rule 2162, "Switches", by {
>
>   * Changing item 2 of the numbered list to read
>       "One or more possible values for instances of that switch,
>        exactly one of which can be designated as the default.
>        No values other than those listed are possible for
>        instances of that switch. One of the values SHOULD
>        always be designated as the default."
>
>   * Changing text "otherwise it takes on its default value" to read
>     "otherwise it takes on its default value, if any".
>
> }
>
> Increase the power of Rule 2162 to 3.0.