On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 12:09 AM Reuben Staley via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 2020-06-07 00:20, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 10:43 PM Reuben Staley via agora-business > > <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > >>> 8418* Aris 3.0 Referenda > >> AGAINST; inventing Unnecessary Terms of Art for Things that don't > >> Require them decreases the Readability of the Ruleset. > > > > I question whether writing out the extremely long-phrase "the Agoran > > Decision on whether to adopt a proposal" is really any more readable? > > For me, "Referendum" is just another term I have to commit to memory. > I'm going to have to remember "Agoran Decision" anyway. But if I'm > reading along and I see the term "Referendum", I'm going to have to do a > search in the ruleset to see what that means, then somehow find my place > again to be able to continue reading. > > If I am a new player reading some rules and I come across the term > "statute", then I'm going to have to figure out what that means. I read > up on that, see that a statute is a subtype of "instrument". Then I have > to read up on instruments to see that an instrument is a type of > "document". So I will have to read up on that, too. I might even get > sidetracked on any of those steps reading through rules about each of > these terms' special attributes just to figure out how one thing works. > > Recursive subtyping that spans the entire ruleset, especially when the > supertype is more explicit in its purpose, just leads to frustration. > For some it might work. For me, it's usually confusing and it causes me > to become apathetic about actually learning the rules.
Okay. It's different for me, but I understand and respect your position. Thank you for explaining. -Aris
