See:
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3411
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3412
On Mon, 29 Oct 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> This randomly occurred to me recently.
>
> Rule 869/44 indicates that a dead organism is not a person, because it is not
> capable of thinking. So if an organism who was a player died, e would cease
> to be a person and COULD NOT be a player any longer. But this is not the same
> as "deregistering", because that is the act of flipping a Citizenship switch
> to Unregistered, and non-persons do not have Citizenship switches. Are there
> rules that would malfunction if this happened?
>
> Non-persons also cannot have Patent Titles, Ribbons etc, so we have a
> potential loss of historical information in Herald, Tailor and Registrar
> reports. Not to mention that dying could cause someone to cease to be a party
> to a contract that would otherwise prohibit em from doing so.
>
> R2350 says:
>
> > Creating a proposal adds it to the Proposal Pool. Once a proposal is
> > created, nether its text nor any of the aforementioned attributes can be
> > changed. The author (syn. proposer) of a proposal is the _person_ who
> > submitted it.
>
> (emphasis mine) If the organism that was once the author of a proposal dies,
> then that proposal's author is now undefined, which is a change in one of the
> aforementioned attributes. So the rule is self-contradictory! Same for
> co-authors.
>
> Regulations Promulgated by an organism cease to be Regulations when the
> organism dies.
>
> And what if an Auctioneer or vote collector dies?
>
> Perhaps Rule 869 should be amended to state that any people continue to be
> people in perpetuity even if they stop meeting the definition of a person.
>
> -twg
>
