2009/3/23 Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk>:
> On Sun, 2009-03-22 at 19:35 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn
>> <jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2009/3/22 Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk>:
>>
>> > On Sun, 2009-03-22 at 23:06 +0100, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> >> The following proposal is made as a part of the Anarchist's
>> weekly
>> >> duties.
>> >> Date of this message: Sun 22 Mar 09
>> >> Date of last fulfilment of these duties: Sat 14 Mar 09
>> >>
>> >> Proposal: Speaker Anarchy
>> >> (AI=3, Disinterested)
>> >>
>> >> Repeal Rule 104 (First Speaker).
>> >
>> > NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
>> >
>> > --
>> > ais523
>> >
>>
>> Funny thing is, this time it was actually the dice that chose
>> it. You
>> guys get this proposal now and again by people who aren't the
>> anarchist, right?
>>
>> Doesn't that rule serve no purpose anyway?
> Any attempt to change it will be met by anger and wrath (well, OK, maybe
> just AGAINST votes) from the long-standing players. The point is it's
> the only rule from the original ruleset that's survived amendment ever
> since the start of Agora. Not doing anything is actually helpful to help
> it maintain that status.
>
> --
> ais523
>
I'm not saying I want to remove it, it just seemed better to go
Anarchist on that one than on any of the others the dice returned,
since they were the kind of rules that would be kept just to make sure
everything didn't break down.
