coppro wrote: > On 08/24/2010 12:27 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> Well, that's slightly more interesting, but the Proposal was a document >> that predated coppro's name change, so there's a case to be made that >> the Proposal's referent transfers to the Rules along with the actual >> language. -G. > > The language clearly says that it's when the document first comes to > reference an entity. There is no rule that references an entity named > 'The Robot' right now, and there is no entity named 'The Robot' (there > is a propoal with that title, but its name is Distributed Proposal 6796, > per rule 2161). When Distributed Proposal 6808 is resolved and ADOPTED, > then a rule will come into existence that references The Robot, and will > thus come to refer to the entity that had that name - i.e. me.
Proto: Append this to second paragraph of R1586: "The previous clause notwithstanding, a document refers to a first-class player by name only if it explicitly states its intention to do so." [idea yoinked from B Nomic's current Rule 2] Also, if 6796 is adopted and refers to you, then the "cannot deregister" clause is trumped by R101(vii).
