I mean, there's no scam here - The parade merely gives future permission to add to it - it's a standard convention to not burn down people's scam monuments if they aren't disruptive - but the parade notes that you may add to it and that's legit.
Most welcome isn't defined, and thus disrespecting that can't be cardable. On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM CuddleBeam <cuddleb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Could be a bit silly but here I go: > > We got "AND FURTHERMORE, additions to this Parade are most welcome when > Events suiting the honour should occur." > > We don't have an explicit definition for "Events" (or at least, I haven't > found one), so I believe that just making it up as an unregulated action > would be the way to go. And if so, you could just make up whatever > convenient amount and scheduled for a would-be event and never actually do > it to satisfy the "when Events suiting the honour should occur." condition, > because it's when they *should* occur, not necessarily when they actually > do or something. > > With that, we can engineer to have this "additions to this Parade are most > welcome" be true for a convenient period of time. And with that, we can > make a proposal that adds some game-winning or other arbitrary content to > that Rule. > > If people vote against it - and this is the scam (but it's weak, much like > how using "Treat Agora Good Forever" as a way to accuse people can be > considered wishy-washy) - you can just threaten them with carding up their > ass, since they're preventing the entry of something that is MOST welcome! > That's really really welcome! It should totally get in, according to those > codified ethics! Are you against them, hrm? Are you that much of a bad > sport? > > Anyway, that's the silly scam lol. > > >
