Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: Self-reference

[Glotmorf <nomicmorf@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Adam Hill <adamahill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >I still think that's cheesy.  But r1299 isn't in
> >conflict with r12.  Even if it was, it would be
> >considered a specific prohibition with regards to
> the
> >general permission in r12: You can have all the
> >self-modifying changes you want; you just can't
> have
> >THAT one.
> >
> >-- Glotmorf
> 
> I respectfully disagree, sir.  Mostly because of one
> sentence in Rule 12: "Even Rule Changes that amend
> or repeal their own authority are permissible."
> 
> To me, that sentence is allowing a Proposal to amend
> its own authority (i.e., essentially create a Rule)
> and repeal its own authority (i.e., essentially
> repeal that same Rule) in the same Prop.  Precisely
> what 1299 forbids.
> 
> Would you be more inclined to support the prop if it
> removed only the one sentence from Rule 12?

Rather than answer your question directly, I'm going
to give you a research assignment: Where in the rules
does it say what version of the rules is in use when a
proposal is being implemented?  And is there anything
in that, or like that, or associated with that, that
says the rules a proposal is implemented under can
change halfway through the implementation?

I'm wondering now if the rules that were in place at
the beginning of the implementation of a proposal are
the same rules that are in place all the way through
said implementation.  If they are, r1299 is redundant,
and all those
change-the-rules-with-the-proposal-to-make-the-proposal-work
proposals were illegal.

-- Glotmorf


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss