isn’t scope in this context where it is in the ruleset? So both of those have the core rules scope?

It’s in context of the previous entry, “If two contradicting parts have equal precedence, the part with more limited scope applies.”

got it. seems reasonable?

“scope” in this context is nothing to do with the location in the ruleset, it’s entirely about the set of circumstances in which the rule applies.

This defines a case that wasn’t defined before, and in a sensible way, so it looks like a good proposal.

thank you again bucky for explaining what scope was in this context

sure, altho it seems to me that “the factory can do X” is narrower scope than “idle workers can’t do X”, bc the former affects the actions of a single individual & a single type of vote