G. wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> I submit the following AI-1 proposal "Out with the Dictator 1":
>> {{
>> Repeal Rule 2324.
>>
>> [This is ineffective if the purported escalations worked.]
>> }}
>>
>> I submit the following AI-3 proposal "Out with the Dictator 3":
>> {{
>> Repeal Rule 2324.
>> }}
>
> I intend, with notice, to cause Rule 2324 to:
> a) enact a Rule with power-1, title "Article V", and the following text:
> Murphy CAN cause this rule to make arbitrary gamestate changes,
> except for any amendment of Rule 2223, by announcement.
> b) and then repeal itself.
>
> [Note: this is proof-of-concept, I think it's possible to use the 4-day
> notice to generally keep ahead of a rule change proposal that has to
> unambiguously specify a change. A promotor/assessor conspiracy with some
> automation could possibly beat this, although it would give rise to the
> possibility of veto, etc.]
I think it would lead to a (potentially highly entertaining) arms race
between dictators and repealers. Consider this hypothetical proposal:
For each rule, in ascending order of ID number, replace each
instance of "<name> CAN cause this rule to make arbitrary gamestate
changes" (where <name> clearly refers to a current or former player)
with "<name> is a newt-neck".
