Good point. In common language terms and current legal effect, "I pledge
to do X" is synonymous with "Pledge: I SHALL do X", so why bother with
the latter, as it's more confusingly written?
On the flip side, maybe "I pledge to do X" would be judged (in current
ruleset) to contain an implicit SHALL.
Putting this amendment in would make the two explicitly different though,
so that "I pledge to do X" would not invoke the time limit, but "I SHALL
do X" would (maybe). Not sure if that's bug or feature...
On Mon, 22 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I don't know if I've ever seen someone use all-caps SHALL in a pledge.
>
> On May 22, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Proposal: "Pledge Timelines" AI=1.7 Coauthor='G.'
> {{{
> Replace the text of Rule 2450 with the following:
> {{{
> Breaking a publicly-made pledge is a cardable offense. If a
> publicly-made pledge
> says a person SHALL do something, without providing a time limit, then e
> SHALL in
> a timely manner in order to not break said pledge.
> }}}
> }}}
