I think that might fall victim to the same thing I tried with CFJ 3737.
When we have contracts, any player can get the Rules to prohibit
anything (at least for certain players), thus removing the protections.
So, when I create a contract that prohibits breathing, breathing would
be indirectly "prohibited or regulated by the Rules" through the
requirement for some people to follow the contract, thus taking away
everyone's right to breathe in the Rules.
Note that I could be wrong about the above, especially if there is CFJ
precedent about this language.
Jason Cobb
On 6/16/19 8:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
V.J. Rada
> Text: Repeal rule 2125 "Regulated Actions"
Jason Cobb wrote:
> Simply striking the last sentence of the Rule would suffice...
I think we'd always like to have some sort of protection against
regulating
breathing and the like. Grabbed some old language from the Rights era,
maybe we should go more along these lines...?
No interpretation of Agoran law or
binding agreement may substantially limit or remove a person's
rights as defined by this Rule, except through the explicit and
legal amendment of this Rule.
[...]
Every person has the right, though not necessarily the
ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is permitted only when the Rules
explicitly or implicitly permit it.
