On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 00:12 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
> 3. Immediately after an Agoran Decision is initiated, the Conservative
> Party acts on behalf of each of its parties to cause that party to vote
> on that decision with the option selected being party stance on that
> decision as defined later in this contract.
If that works, it shouldn't. And act-on-behalf needs an overhaul anyway.
I submit the following proposal (AI 1.7, II 1, Title="Some actual
act-on-behalf legislation), and intend with 3 support to make it
distributable:
{{{{
Create a new power-1.7 rule with the following text:
{{{
Under certain circumstances (explained in this rule and/or other rules),
it is POSSIBLE for a person (the attornor) to perform an action on
behalf of another person (the attornee); doing so is known as attorning
that person (syn. "act on behalf of <the attornee>", "act on <the
attornee>'s behalf"). It is IMPOSSIBLE to attorn if:
- The action could be performed by the attornee by announcement, and
- At least one rule of power at least 1.7 explicitly permits the action,
and no rule forbids it, and
- The attornor is first-class.
When an attornor attorns, the effect is the same as if the attornee had
performed that action by announcement.
An attornor CAN attorning to perform a specific action by announcement
if the attornee is party to a contract that specifically allows the
attornor (or any of a set of players that includes the attornor) to
perform that action (or to perform any of a set of actions that includes
that action).
}}}
In rule 2169, replace "act on the party's behalf" with "attorn the
party".
}}}}
--
ais523
