On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Ed Murphy wrote:
> scshunt wrote:
>
> > Proposal: What? (AI=1)
> > {{{
> > Repeal Rule 2353 (The Conductor).
> > [All switches must be tracked]
> > }}}
>
> The point is, if we create a new switch and a new officer, but forget
> to specify that the latter tracks the former (this has actually
> happened at least once), then R2353 prevents R2162(c) from declaring
> that the new thing-intended-to-be-a-switch isn't actually a switch.
Considered it's only to be used when there's something buggy which
would probably be fixed when caught, a good compromise is to add a
sentence to another officer (Registrar?)
Proposal, 'master switcher', AI-2, please:
---
Repeal Rule 2353 (The Conductor).
[on the off-chance previous repeal without replacement is voted down]
Amend Rule 2139 (The Registrar) by appending the following
paragraph:
The Registrar is also responsible for tracking any switches
that would otherwise lack an officer to track them.
----
