Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Undead, and other legal fictions [revised]

[0x4461736864617368 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree about needing to revise the player eligibility requirements. I
think that needs to have more than three ndays consideration before a
rule is proposed, though. I'm not going to bother re-revising this
proposal, as since it doesn't actually create a rule that clause does
nothing.


Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> It should. But I suggest that rather than making a self-repealing rule
> (which by the way isn't quite the case as your proposal doesn't mention
> creating or amending a rule) you just make the proposal state that AOF be
> deregistered as a player. A proposal can have such an effect on the
> gamestate without creating a rule, and we won't have to worry about messing
> with the ruleset.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Billy Pilgrim
>
>
> On 11/23/07, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   
>> 0x4461736864617368 wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> {{
>>>     Upon passage of this proposal, if the Association of Federated
>>> Organizations is a player it is subsequently deregistered as a player.
>>>       
>> This rule then repeals itself.
>>     
>>> }}
>>>       
>> This should be accompanied by a revision of the eligibility requirements
>> for playerhood.
>> _______________________________________________
>> spoon-discuss mailing list
>> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>   

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss