On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Sean Hunt wrote: > On 01/13/2010 05:27 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> Another question: Is it a bug that the base ratification rule (R1551) >> doesn't actually claim precedence over rules it would override (e.g. >> over power-3 rules of lower number)? In particular, ratification >> doesn't claim any kind of precedence over Agoran Decision base rules, >> while Rule 208 "takes precedence over any rule that would provide >> another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved."? >> >> Rule 2034 doesn't help, as the self-ratification part of it doesn't >> do any precedence claiming, either. >> >> -G. > > I don't think so, because Rule 208, while taking precedence, doesn't actually > contradict the self-ratification rules in any way. Note in particular that it > doesn't preclude other methods of resolution. If something tried to ratify > something directly contradictory to 208, it would fail, but as far as I tell, > there is no contradiction.
It depend on what "minimally alters" in the game state to cause ratification. Accepting a false voting report alters the resulting value of votes, which is in a common-sense legal sense is the same as altering votes, which is against both R208 and the second, precedence-claiming paragraph of R2034. -G.
