pikhq wrote:
On Thursday 24 January 2008 20:05:13 comex wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008 9:41 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"This rule takes precedence over all other rules." is needlessly
redundant; the only other Power 4 rule is the Fountain. CFJs have
determined that you need not hail Eris, so you're good. ;)
Not necessarily. Let's say I wanted to violate someone's R101 rights.
R101 "takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions
of a person's rights or privileges. While, if I tried to violate
those rights, R1482 would say that my rule wins, you could argue that
R1482 is then "allow[ing] restrictions of a person's rights" and so
R101 claims to take precedence over it.
Hmmm, although on second thought, this just ends up in the 'case of
problematic precedence' section. My rule's claim would just mix the
situation up further, not resolve it.
Your proposed rule is power 4. R101 is power 3. So, your proposed rule takes
precedence over R101.
On the other hand, Rule 1482 is power 3, so if it's considered to be in
conflict with Rule 101, then /that/ conflict is resolved in Rule 101's
favor by Rule 1030. This may or may not constitute an argument for
increasing the Power of Rules 1482 and 1030 to 3.1 ...
