On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:57 PM Alex Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 12:59 -0600, Sprocklem S wrote:
> > Proposal: Ruleset Ratification
> > {{{
> > Amend Rule 1681 ("The Logical Rulesets") by appending the following
> > paragraph at the end:
> >
> > The portions of the SLR and the FLR constituting the substantive
> > aspects of the rules, as defined in Rule 2141, are self-ratifying. The
> > Rulekeepor SHALL NOT knowingly publish an SLR or FLR where the
> > self-ratifying portion is incorrect.
> > }}}
> >
> > [I don't think making the whole thing self-ratifying would cause any
> > problems, but there's a lot in the FLR, so I limited it to just
> > rule-specific stuff.]
>
> I'm *strongly* opposed to this. Rulekeepors sometimes make
> (unintentional) errors, and sometimes these errors are things that
> could seriously break the game. Having rules changes limited to methods
> with much more oversight (e.g. making full-Ruleset ratifications rare,
> with many players looking over the purported ruleset for loopholes and
> omissions) is much safer for Agora's ongoing existence.
>
> Note also that we never ratify the FLR, only the SLR. This means that
> if a rule *was* misstated, we can then place an "amended by
> ratification" in the FLR to explain what happened to it, thus making
> the rule history an accurate reflection of reality. If we ratified the
> FLR, we'd also be ratifying an incorrect history of how the rule got to
> where it did.
>
> --
> ais523
>
I'd go so far as to make a rule stating that the FLR CANNOT be ratified,
for reasons noted above.
