On 1/13/2019 6:33 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I think that dependency should be a CANNOT for the Assesor, rather than a SHALL NOT, because it ensures that any mistake isn’t legally binding. The resolution of a proposal is self-ratifying in any case, so it won’t inject long term uncertainty.
Making it a CANNOT would be a power-3 thing again, to overrule R208 and/or 106. (If you think about it, it would be a security hole if you could apply a CANNOT at power-1, because that would mean someone could scam in a power-1 "a proposal CANNOT be resolved unless I say so" rule).
