Sounds reasonable. I'll add it to the general reports rule. -Aris
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 12:32 PM Gaelan Steele <[email protected]> wrote: > How about a rule to this effect: “A Convergence is a change to the > gamestate designed to resolve ambiguity in the current state. [Maybe: > Causing a change to the gamestate to be considered a Convergence is > protected at power 3. A player may cause a gamestate change to be > considered a Convergence with 3 Agoran Consent.] > When officeholders are required to provide historical information, they > NEED NOT accurately document the changes leading up to or during the > Convergence accurately, but SHALL note that the Convergence occurred.” > > The wording is a bit awkward, but I think this would come in handy now as > well as in the future. > > Gaelan > > > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:08 PM, Aris Merchant < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 12:40 AM Alex Smith <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 2018-03-18 at 00:09 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > >>> Okay, everyone, here's a revised patch. Please point out any other > >>> issues you see. All changes more significant than a typo fix have > >>> been moved to a new section for reader's convenience . Gaelan, some > >>> version of this will be in this week's distribution, so you can > >>> withdraw your original. > >> [snip] > >>> The Rulekeepor MAY list historical annotations for changes made by > >>> the following portion of this proposal (until the text “END CLEANUP”) > >>> however e wishes, including incorrectly or not at all. > >> > >> I'm not convinced this actually works legally. You may need to create a > >> temporary rule for the purpose. > > > > > > I personally agree with you. How about "The Rulekeepor SHOULD NOT be > > punished for listing...". That makes it clear that it's non-binding > > meta-game guidance. Of course, actual codification would be preferable, > but > > I agree with other commenters that it's impractical. > > > > -Aris > > > >> > >
