Warrigal wrote:
> If a power-1 rule states that a certain person can do something "with
> 0 support" or "without 100 objections", the power-3 rule 1728 allows
> them to do it.
Not if another rule takes precedence over the power-1 rule and says
they can't (or, equivalently, secures the change with a power threshold
greater than 1). In particular, 1728(a) uses "The rules".
> If a power-1 rule says that a person can perform a dependent action
> non-dependently, so does the power-3 rule 1728.
Again, the last paragraph of 1728 uses "the rules".
> If a power-1 rule defines a very long period of time as a Holiday, the
> power-3 rule 1769 messes up timing everywhere.
Rule 1698 would block any holiday longer than three weeks, because it
would extend voting periods and self-ratification beyond the four-week
limit. How this would apply to multiple holidays separated by short
gaps is less clear. (Of course, someone could be a PITA and define
each odd-numbered day of each month as a holiday.)
> If a power-1 rule defines information as being an essential parameter
> for all Agoran decisions, the power-3 rule 107 requires it to be known
> whenever an Agoran decision is initiated.
If it's ambiguous, then R107's "correctly identified" could be
disputed. If it's not reasonably available, then R1698's four-week
limit might apply (we should probably add "reasonable" to that rule).
> Therefore, I submit the following proposal, titled "Remove power-1
> scams", with adoption index 3:
>
> {In rule 1728, "Dependent Actions", replace "A person (the performer)
> CAN perform an action dependently" with "A rule allows a person (the
> performer) to perform an action dependently", "The rules" with "The
> rule", and "A dependent action CAN be performed non-dependently as
> otherwise permitted by the rules." with "An action being defined as a
> dependent action does not prevent it from being performed
> non-dependently as otherwise permitted by the rules."
The first part of this looks fine, by loose analogy with the last
paragraph of R1688 (my first draft of this clause used a direct CANNOT).
> In rule 1769, "Holidays", after the sentence "A Holiday is a period of
> time designated as such by the Rules.", add the sentence "Designating
> a period of time as a Holiday is secured."
Or "designated as such by this rule". Or secure it with a power
threshold of 2, and split the last paragraph into another rule. (Past
holidays have included April Fool's Day, Guy Fawkes Day, and possibly
Agora's Birthday.)
> In rule 107, "Initiating Agoran Decisions", after paragraph (e), add
> the paragraph "Defining information as an essential parameter for an
> Agoran decision is secured, with power threshold equal to the power of
> the rule authorizing its initiation."}
Nice referential-ness.
