> On Feb 27, 2019, at 11:28 PM, Aris Merchant
> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It definitely does, to my reading. Can you reread?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 8:27 PM Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I hate to point this out after the distribution, but if I'm correct in my
>> reading, this does not actually amend the rule. After this passes, won't
>> intents still be broken?
I agree with Aris. As I read it, it has two provisions: (1) it changes the
gamestate to what it would have been if the amendment had been in effect and
then (2) it amends the rule.
So I think it works and does amend the rule.
