On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 8:24 PM Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > This proposal codifies a few common sense rules about timelines. For > instance, retroactive modifications are possible, but work by creating > a legal fiction, rather than by changing what actually happened.
Overall: Seems quite well designed. Personally I'd prefer to just ban retroactive modifications, but this proposal would do a good job of codifying the existing precedent. Nits: > A timeline is a sequence of events, worldstates, and/or gamestates, > as entailed by the standard definition of the word "timeline". This is a bit wordy; I think you could remove the second line, or remove the whole paragraph. > Accordingly, it can be modified retroactively. Modifications to the Standard > Timeline other than by events or actions taking place as they actually > happen are secured at power 3. This could be simplified a bit – perhaps "Accordingly, it can be modified retroactively; such retroactive modifications are secured at power 3". > By default, any entity with a power less than the power of this rule that > refers to the past (or the future) is to be interpreted as referring to > events > on the Standard Timeline; however, entities may explicitly reference events > in a different timeline. Why exclude entities with high power? > "The judgement of an inquiry case should be based on the facts and legal > situation as they objectively existed at the time the inquiry case was > initiated, not taking into account any events or retroactive modifications > since that time. This could be shortened if you just reference the Objective Timeline by name.
