I’m relying more heavily on rule 2221 (“Cleanliness”) for mechanism. It provides:
> Any player CAN clean a rule without objection by specifying one or more > corrections to spelling, grammar, capitalization, formatting, and/or dialect, > or to whether a synonym or abbreviation is used in place of a word or phrase, > in the rule's text and/or title; the rule is amended by this rule as > specified by that person. I’ll admit that respecifying the entire rule is not the _ideal_ way of specitying “one or more corrections to … formatting,” but it appears to meet all the other elements of this rule as I understand it, and my message is intended to meet the form requirements for a dependent action (in this case “[cleaning] a rule without objection”). I’m only relying on rule 2429 for policy, not mechanism. I agree with your interpretation of how it otherwise applies in isolation. What have I missed? -o On May 23, 2019, at 1:14 AM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com> wrote: > You are mistaken as to how the Bleach rule works. It does not mean any player > can change the spacing by way of cleaning, it means that I can format rules > using whatever spacing I want, as long as I respect paragraph breaks. > > If the Bleach rule did work that way, then every rule would be wrapped > several different ways because it seems everyone submits proposals using > different wrapping standards. All I generally do is wrap the ruleset to 72 > characters. > > This mistake is understandable, however. For future reference, what you can > do instead of attempt a cleaning is inform me that I have messed up the > spacing somewhere and I will remedy it in the next draft.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
