Self-killed, failed by Kevan.
Adminned at 17 Mar 2009 02:11:43 UTC
Repeal Glossary Rule 3.1 (Typographic Conventions). If there’s any of the rule left after repealing it, repeal it again.
[ This is the rule saying that any italicised words in the gamestate are magically invisible. There are currently three rules that use italics, and all of them would be fine if the italic text was legally binding. Two of them say “For example” at the start of their example, which is an obvious enough way to do it.
This recent proposal from a new player inadvertently used italics for emphasis, although luckily their sentence still made legal sense without the emphasised word.
And I’m still not really looking forward to (a repeat of?) the scam where someone sneaks an italicised “not” into a large, boring proposal. Scams are fine, but exploiting a simple loophole that we’ve all known about for months doesn’t seem very satisfying to pull or to watch. I think we can live without the flavour text rule. ]