On 17/06/2013 9:06 PM, omd wrote:
Vigintennial Blitz CFJ: If a proposal purports to reward or penalize
voters based on the votes they cast on that proposal, or based on any
other action taken / not taken by any player prior to the end of the
voting period on that proposal, then that proposal will, if passed, be
in conflict with rule 108.
Arguments: Why would it?
I announce that, by rule 214, I am the Judge.
I deliver my judgement: FALSE
(ie. that would NOT conflict with 108).
Now agora.qoid.us doesn't work for me, but this does:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130115221259/http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/stare.txt
> 108:
> Michael, 001:
This does not forbid Rules to be explicitly dependent on
circumstances before they are enacted, for example the vote on the
Proposal that created the Rule.
I concur with Michael. Merely depending on history, without attempting
to "re-write" it, does not violate 108.
Now "001" seems to indicate the very first CFJ from 20 years ago was
about this, and I take it that omd was aware of this when he raised this
current CFJ. Nice!
-Dan
