On 1/16/20 10:45 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Title: The Reset Button v2 > Adoption index: 3.0 > Author: Aris > Co-authors: G. > > > Create the following power 3.0 rule entitled "The Reset Button": > > An officer CAN, without 3 objections, pursuant to a memorandum finding it > in the best interests of the game, issue an adjustment, which shall be > a public document. When the adjustment is issued, all changes that are > included in the adjustment take effect. > > This is a RECOMMENDED method for resetting aspects of the game in a > fair and equitable manner following the discovery and/or exploitation > of unintended loopholes within the Rules, whether the exploitation > was accidental or purposeful. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Title: Patches > Adoption index: 3.0 > Author: Aris > Co-authors: > > Create the following power 3.0 rule entitled "Patches": > > An officer CAN, without 3 objections, pursuant to a memorandum finding it > in the best interests of the game, issue a regulation known as a patch. > To the extent the patch is not manifestly abusive, disproportionate, or > unreasonable, the rules are to be interpreted as if they were modified > in the manner stipulated by the patch. > > Enacting and modifying patches are secured. A patch's promulgator CAN amend > it without 3 objections. Any person CAN repeal the patch by announcement > once it has been rendered obsolete. > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the ideas, as I've said before (although I haven't yet thoroughly combed through these drafts for any bugs). One thing, though: These two mechanisms seem redundant to me - an adjustment applies "all changes", which could include rule changes, so why have a second, strictly weaker alternative that only affects the interpretation of the rules? -- Jason Cobb
