Yep. Fair enough.

but is “to replace and replacement text” really the right wording?

Pavitra, you’re reading it incorrectly; (terms to replace) and (replacement text).

“Use the new terms” is arguably vague enough for the enacting admin to insert them wherever he or she wishes, and this proposal was made by Comex.

Although hm, the scam I had in mind tails off and doesn’t actually get anywhere useful, on closer inspection.

Fortunately, comex is not an admin.

[Ienpw] It’s not impossible to collude with an admin, and at least a couple of admins (including Coppro last dynasty) have been known to enact proposals under legal but perverse interpretations, either to cause somebody to win, or because it amuses them.

(And oh, I thought it was Comex who made the Agoran takeover CfJ when I said “this proposal was made by Comex”, but it was actually Coppro, looking back.)

I don’t see what Kevan is saying? How could those words be inserted anywhere? I’ll change my vote if it’s explained to me.

[sgeo] It just says to “use the new terms” in the sentence. Enacting it as “If there Player is no Player Emperor Emperor, the Emperor Dynasty is a Emperor Player Emperor Metadynasty.” - I can’t see any way to produce a scammable sentence, but maybe I’m missing something.

This is probably trivial, but I’m wary of saying “never mind, this is probably trivial” when the game is in the balance.

Ooh, I just saw one: it doesn’t say instead of Artist/Critic. You could have “Each Dynasty may be headed by a single Artist Player”, effectively disqualifying all Players from being Emperor, and forcing all Dynasties to be Metadynasties until it was fixed.

[Pavitra] Given that we’re heading into a metadynasty anyway, I suppose we can live with that.

I’m tempted to vote against just because this rule seems to never get enacted