Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Two-tier precedence

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

teucer@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I, on the other hand, will happily vote FOR iff you switch a and b in
> the new precedence mechanic.

That would make it pointless to try to directly alter an Essential rule,
because you could just try (at a 1/2 rather than 2/3 threshold) to
create a non-Essential rule claiming precedence over it instead (unless
the Essential rule had its own claim of precedence, but the idea behind
this is to encourage more complacency about such claims).
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss