On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 04:57:31PM -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 10/31/20 4:55 PM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> >> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
> >>
> >> Title: I definitely authored this
> >> Adoption index: 2.0
> >> Author: ATMunn
> >> Co-author: Jason
> >>
> >> Amend Rule 2531 by replacing the first paragraph with the following:
> >> {
> >> Any attempt to levy a fine is INEFFECTIVE if it does not include value of
> >> the fine in blots, the name of the person being fined (the perp), and the
> >> specific reason for the fine.
> >> }
> >>
> >> Amend Rule 2531 by renumbering the list so that the numbers start at 1 and
> >> end at 10, with each number other than the fist one higher than the
> >> previous.
> > I'm confused. What do you consider to be the first paragraph of that rule?
> >
> > If item (1) was part of the first paragraph, then the amended rule will
> > only have 9 list items.
> >
> > If item (1) was not part of the first paragraph, then it will still be
> > there so that text will appear twice.
> >
>
> The first paragraph contains the first list item. By precedent,
> paragraph structure is determined by prose, not formatting. Once that is
> removed, there will be 10 list items. Right now it looks like there are
> 9 because there are two number 5s due to a slightly broken proposal.
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
Okay, that makes more sense, but I'm still skeptical. Can you say more
about that precedent? Normally the only way I can tell for sure where
one paragraph ends and the next starts is formatting (a blank line).
I'd be more comfortable if changes specified in proposals didn't rely on
CFJ precedents unless they're really obvious and uncontroversial. (CFJ
judgments can turn out to have been incorrect, right?)
--
Falsifian
