Proposal: Full Power [Appendix]
Fails 4-7. - Jumble
Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 16:04:39 UTC
Add the following to “Official Posts”
Other rules may not place limits what a Call for Judgement may accomplish. If the enactment of a Call for Judgement would require the Admin enacting it to perform some otherwise illegal action, the CFJ includes an implicit grant of permission to still perform such an action.
If https://blognomic.com/archive/appendix_by_any_means is still pending, fail it. If it has already been enacted, remove the text “, except for the legal enactment of a CFJ” from the ruleset.
If people vote for a Call for Judgement, it stands to reason that they want the result to happen even if the result cannot legally happen. Requiring them to explicitly go “yeah this happens even if the rules otherwise say it can’t” in a second CfJ which should still pass because you already got the quorum to pass your first CfJ…
This also helps ensure we don’t accidentally (or someone doesn’t maliciously) lock the game by creating part of the rules that calls for judgement cannot legally remove. If a Call for Judgement wants to remove a rule, it should be able to do so regardless of what the rest of the rules try to claim. Calls for Judgement are a very important tool and we should make sure that tool is as flexible and useful as possible.
Bucky:
This contradicts the prioritization rule on the matter of what can override it, and the prioritization rule takes precedence.