Re: [s-d] [s-b] Agora & B

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

There is the Oracularity mechanism which has not been used much lately. I
prefer oracularities to "automatic updates" because we need to somehow agree
on the wording and extent of the update. Also, consultations shouldn't
become a way of fast-tracking proposals.

Billy Pilgrim

On Nov 26, 2007 7:42 AM, William Berard <william.berard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> I was about to ask that, since my last consultation (on how an Object
> cannot
> be a Player and a Faction) was deemed TRUE, on the grounds that a Faction
> is
> not an External Force, but yet this does not appear explicitely un rule
> 5-3,
> so I submited a proposal to include it explicitely there. Is this
> redundant
> with the answer to the consultation? should there be some automatic update
> of the text of the rules to include implicit consequences of the existing
> rules once this consequence have been aknowledge by a consultation?
>
>
> On 11/26/07, Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This brings up a point. I like the way Agora annotates the rule set
> > with judgment decisions. Any interest in starting that here?
> >
> > - Hose
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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