On 4/12/20 8:12 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote: > Arguments: After extremely careful and definitely not cursory thought, I > think that the first sentence of R2601 succeeds. We generally accept the > passive voice as being acceptable for rules to cause actions to occur, so I > see no reason this shouldn't function here. The cause of R2601's amendment > is, clearly, itself. > > -Alexis
Counterargument: per R2141/12 (at the time): "A rule ... is always taking effect". Once the text has been amended out of the rule, that text is no longer there to be taking effect, so how can it possibly cause a rule-change? -- Jason Cobb
