Not sure about this. But we should at least restrict the “cannot perform” to dynastic actions, so that we don’t accidentally lock ourselves out of raising and voting on CfJs (or require admins to keep an eye on the legality of cast votes).

Reading this again, making all “shoulds” (or even something like the proposal resolution’s “highly encouraged to report the final tally of Votes”) into compulsory actions which risk locking players out of the game seems like a big overstep.

I still think not following rules is just breaking them, and falls just outside of the ruleset in scope. As the other players of a game, albeit an oddly overspecified, scam-friendly one, the natural reply is simply to be annoyed.

Could go under Fair Play, though.

Caviat: if the rule itself gets specific about a consequence for breaking it, that (probably) takes precedence. Like when duelists don’t submit plans, they lose the duel in 48 hours.

So if we pass a rule about following the rules, we’re kind of overriding that basic expectation.

Superfluous at best.

alright