Well yes, but if it worked due to explicit Rules text prior to Sept 2016, and
nobody noticed that removing that text broke things, and nobody questioned it,
then no precedent has yet been set with the new rules text, even if we've all
assumed it worked in the mean time. Most of those wins-by-proposal would have
been prior to that.
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> I'm unsure of the legal status of win by proposal, but the Herald's monthly
> report states under the Champions heading that eighteen players, including
> yourself, have done so. Precedent tends to fill in where the rules are
> unclear, so I submit that these proposal wins are effective.
>
> On 10/12/2018 03:05 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 17:00 -0400, D. Margaux wrote:
> > > CFJ judged TRUE: “At least one person won the game as a result
> > > proposal 8097 taking effect.”
> >
> > Is it even possible to win the game by proposal? I don't see that
> > victory method listed in the ruleset, and rule 2449 implies that a
> > victory has to be caused by a rule. I guess you could make the argument
> > that rule 106 does it.
> >
> > (This is relevant because you'd think the rule for wins by legislation
> > would set out a clarity standard, like there is for rule changes, but
> > there isn't one, so there's no standard to consult.)
> >
> > Given how often people have been coming up with "win right away"
> > proposal minigames, and how many of them have been voted for, backfired
> > and ended up with everyone winning, it'd arguably be for the good of
> > Agora to put limits on wins by proposal (or on large simultaneous wins
> > in general). Wins are rather cheapened when large proportions of the
> > playerbase can get them by accident.
> >
>
> --
> Trigon
>
