Ah I did forget to exclude that rule. It really should’ve been put into the Special Case Rules at some point.

I’m not sure if enacting an already enacted proposal does anything though

I can’t see anything that prevents an enacted Proposal from being enacted again, if something causes that to happen.

Leaning to against on this one, though - I only proposed it last dynasty because the Emperor was asleep. Most Emperors (as Card is doing) make fix proposals, because the game quickly hits a point where any proposal is political, and the Emperor has no stake in winning.

Everyone having two free fix slots is going to remove some of the pressure to double-check proposals before submitting them - the only downside is occasional chaos where a chain of fixes doesn’t quite work as intended (as with the badly-numbered bulleted list last dynasty). Given the choice, I’d rather play a game with fewer, more closely proof-read proposals.

I liked the rule.

Because I dislike the way this proposal is framed. It seems to leave weird wiggle room for an enacting admin.

[Brendan] We enacted the same change last dynasty, I think Zaphod’s just copying that over.

There is definitely some risk here, and I’m not sure we need the admin veto in a dynasty with an active Emperor. (My support for it last time around was on the grounds that we had no Emperor to cast vetoes, so could be in trouble if an innocuous-looking cleanup proposal had a ruleset-crashing typo - or deliberate loophole - that nobody noticed, and which we’d all waved through as boring cleanup.)