Aris wrote:
Title: Clearer Regulated Actions
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s):
[The current regulated actions rule has a few problems with it.
First, there is the perennial problem where Rule 2125(1) appears to
make all actions regulated, since the rules arguably permit
everything they do not forbid. Although precedent (CFJ 3519) has
ruled that this is not the case, several players are not convinced
by the precedent. In any case, there's no particular reason a
MAY should make an action regulated.
Rule 2125(3) has a different problem. Precedent (CFJ 3740) has ruled
that the phrase "required to be a recordkeepor" only applies if the
rules explicitly use the word "recordkeepor", which is confusing
to say the least. Furthermore, the reasoning for that precedent
appears to be that in some cases players are required to track natural
concepts that should not be regulated state, e.g. the list of
players interested in judging. If the goal is to limit it to rule
defined state, it should say that, and this proposal would make it
do so.]
Amend Rule 2125, "Regulated Actions", by replacing:
An action is regulated if: (1) the Rules limit, allow, enable, or
permit its performance; (2) the Rules describe the circumstances
under which the action would succeed or fail; or (3) the action
would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some
player is required to be a recordkeepor.
with:
An action is regulated if: (1) the Rules limit or enable its
performance; (2) the Rules describe the circumstances under
which the action would succeed or fail; or (3) the action would,
as part of its effect, modify a rule-defined state of affairs.
How about merging (1) and (2) into "the Rules describe the circumstances
under which the action is or is not effective and/or legal"?
