RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposal limiting jurisdic tion of rules:

[Daniel Chapman <Daniel.Chapman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
ONLY that he must post new pictures of himself Randalling, it would be legal
under this rule.  Of course, since Rule 350/0 predates my proposal, it will
override my proposed rule anyhow.
-----Original Message-----

Oh, and I guess I was wrong:  We have no rules of precedence of rules.  I
think we probably should, since I think it adds a keen glimmer of fun to
everything.  I'm weird like that.

Oh, and to back up my statement, I'll quote the sentence of 350/0 (Joel must
Randall) which would be illegal under my new rule.

-----QUOTED RULE-----
The Player known as Joel Uckelman is ordered to Randal once within 10 days
after this rule takes effect. The action of Randalling will be recorded via
camara and posted to the Nomic web site. These photographs will remain for a
minimum of 6 months.
-----QUOTED RULE-----

So, The first sentence would make the rule illegal.  Not sure how the rest
of the rule works if the first setence is illegal.

And honestly, I think that if we later decide to make a rule which requires
an action "out of game" for a player, we should ammend THIS proposal.  Or
perhaps we could modify the proposal to be that any rule requiring an out of
game action of a player must have unanimous (or 2/3 or something like that)
consent.  But, I still don't really like the idea that we could elect a
position "Unlucky Loser" which is required (by the rules) to send all of his
money to Joel, and the position is awarded to the player living closest to
Romulus, Michigan.  (And yes, go ahead and FIND a way to legislate around
that using our US Constitution).