ais523 wrote: > I call for judgement on the statement "Rule 101 is greater than rule > 2029". > > Evidence: Excerpt from Rule 2141: "Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned > by the Rulekeepor, and are strictly ordered." > > Arguments: The power-3 rule 2141, by insisting that rules are strictly > ordered, implies that it's possible to have a meaningful > less-than/greater-than comparison between them. However, nothing in the > ruleset seems to imply what the ordering actually /is/: precedence? > power? ID number? order of enactment? something else? It's rather lucky > that the relevant bit of gamestate is currently completely irrelevant, > or we'd have major headaches trying to figure out just what that > platonic order is.
Gratuitous: Rule 2161, the only other rule to use the phrase "strictly ordered", implies that the ordering is determined by ID number, which SHALL match order of ID number assignment, which in turn SHALL roughly match order of enactment (the definition of ASAP allows some variance).
