> If you're interested in working in this area, Maud (sometime player, > currently watcher) has offered a nominal reward for a proposal that does > away with the current precedence mechanism altogether. See if you can > avoid rule conflicts entirely, or (easier) if you can come up with a > more structured way to manage precedence relationships.
Well, we could exclusively use index numbers for precedence. This might make the ruleset more readable as a whole. On the other hand, it would require renumbering the entire ruleset, and making index numbers mutable by any proposal of sufficient AI (perhaps index number divided by 1000). Also, if there was any need for rules to refer to specific other rules, they would have to do so by name rather than number. (Again, perhaps better for readability.) I'm sure this has been discussed to death before, but in the absence of a proper search tool for the archives, I'd rather risk the flames.
