On Thu, 2023-05-25 at 17:00 +0200, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote: > As annoying as it is, it seems perfectly legal to do, to me. > > I create and submit the following Proposal: > > Title: Go Home, You're Drunk > AI: 3 > Author: Yachay > Co-Authors: None > // Comment: This is a hotfix to the still-open issue of ais' Dancing Around > the Town Fountain scam. > // Comment: Retroactive changes are secured at Power 3, hence the AI of 3. > > Retroactively make it so that this rule has been in effect since this > Proposal was created.
That's a proposal, not a rule, so "this rule" has no referent. I think you may have omitted some of the proposal. Besides, this sort of thing is usually unnecessary: if we decide collectively that it's best to stop people repeating scams, and people do it anyway, we can wait for the loophole to be fixed and then reverse any "excess" abuses of it by proposal at that point (which is simpler and less confusing then trying to make retroactive changes, and also can usually be done with less than 3 power so is more likely to pass). -- ais523
