[Nomic02] Pointer-chasing

[Dylan O'Donnell]

Carl Muckenhoupt wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Admiral Jota wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> > 
> > > Pointer-chasing [Psmith]:
> > > A proposal for one rule removal, and one new rule.
> > >   Remove Rule 17.
> > >
> > >   No individual rule may be changed after it's been added, except to
> > >   amend references to specific rule numbers within it, or to remove it
> > >   from the game, either of which can only be done by unanimous
> > >   agreement.
> 
> I'm still undecided about this.

The intention is to turn number-references into symbolic links rather
than hard links, to prevent having to delete-and-repropose all
referring rules whenever a rule is amended by deletion-and-reproposal.
A convenience, nothing more.

>  I just want to comment on this new trend
> of compound proposals, which started with the Servant's Quarters proposal.  
> My opinion is that nothing in the rules forbid it; if everything in a
> proposal is allowed to be done by unanimous consent, then the proposal as
> a whole can be decided by unanimous consent.

Yes, I was going to query Jota's use of it in SQ; but looked at Rule 10
again and noted that "a change" didn't necessarily mean an atomic change.

-- 
:  Dylan O'Donnell                     http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/  :
:            "Senseless property destruction has failed me, and so           :
:             I must resort to wackiness."                                   :
:                      -- Mr Disease, "Triangle and Robert"                  :