On Wed, 2026-04-15 at 11:16 -0300, juan via agora-business wrote: > I'm tired of looking for the same precedent over and over for the > same well-established interpretations. I petition the Webmastor to > create a section of the website where judges may submit documents > with doctrine. The section may be called “Doctrine”, and the > Webmastor may even pass regulations for the process of submitting > them, depending on Agoran consent.
Normally we put these into the FLR (meaning that the Rulekeepor would look after them). For example, there are a number of subject-line- related precedents in the FLR annotations to rule 478. One problem is that these can gradually become unclear or inconsistent over time (but I expect doctrine might have the same problem). It strikes me that if we want more forceful ways to record doctrine, we may as well record it in the text of the rules themselves (by proposal). By giving it legal force, we would reduce the risk that it's wrong. -- ais523
