Re: [s-d] [s-b] ais523's Refresh Proposal

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

comex wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Alex Smith <ais523@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>      * Things which could cause a lot of unknown gamestate if they
>>        stalled or went wrong, such as assigning CFJs (= Oracularities;
>>        this matters because judges can't judge for a while after having
>>        a case assigned to them), and setting voting power, always
>>        succeed whenever anyone attempts them;
> What, what?  Since when is increasing voting power pragmatic?  I want :-P

Only if you're the Grand Poobah.  And if Agora elects /you/ Grand
Poobah, then it deserves what it gets.  :)

>>        Incorrect
>>        proposal results don't cause this instantly, but instead after a
>>        week if nobody challenges them. (This gives pretty much a
>>        universal fix mechanism which nobody's actually had to use yet,
>>        due to the other mechanisms available; just submit a proposal
>>        and purport to resolve it, and as long as nobody challenges what
>>        you're doing it works.)
> 
> I still think Rule 2034.2 prevents that from actually working.

The opposing interpretation is that an incorrect "resolution" isn't
really a resolution at all, until/unless auto-self-ratification makes
it become correct.  Auto-self-ratification of a correct resolution is
a no-op, so 2034.2 doesn't apply.

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