Levi wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
comex wrote:
On Sunday 18 November 2007, Levi Stephen wrote:
(g) If the outcome is APPROVED, then the vote collector MUST
perform the action as soon as possible after resolving the decision.
add CAN
Replace with CAN, actually. A player intending to perform a dependent
action should be able to change eir mind, unless the rules require em
to go through with it in a specific situation (e.g. last paragraph of
Rule 2154).
Thanks. I think CAN does better describe what I'm trying to achieve here.
It might be beneficial to check some of the places where Agoran Consent
is used to make sure that the player changing eir mind to not perform
the action makes sense.
I'm a little uneasy by the following reasoning:
* Player A says I'm going to do this, if you think I should
* Agora says (through consent), yes that's a good idea.
* Player A says, actually I don't want to anymore.
Is it giving Player A the ability to override the opinion of Agora?
I think you're right, it needs a case-by-case review. Here are all
the things currently possible via Agoran consent:
[2144] deregister a redundant partnership
[2154] install an officer (already required when part of the IADoP's
duty to attempt quarterly changes)
[2172] act on behalf of Agora
[2147] certify a protectorate
