On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 14:40, James Cook via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 21:12, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 17:09, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > 3. Definitions of specific types of decisions are meted out to > lower-level > > > rules or even subsidiary bodies of law, e.g. election procedure no > longer > > > needs to be tied in to high-powered rules. > > > > > > > Oh this made me think of self-ratification and how we should fix that. > > Letting decisions always self-ratify that they had a specific outcome > would > > a power that's safe to pass onto subsidiary law, but only if it's a legal > > fiction and doesn't alter any preconditions). > > > > Do we have a preferred fix? I recall that someone (Falsifian?) submitted > a > > proto that I think I liked more than mine but I 'd have to go back to see > > if that's true. > > Maybe you mean my "Retroactive events" proto? > > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2020-February/056594.html > > - Falsifian > I think so. On reread, I'm not as strongly a fan of it as I remember. Should I go ahead with trying to fix my legal fiction-based one, or do you want to try to push yours forward more? -Alexis
