Assuming that “shall” implies “can”; I think it does in BlogNomic. (If not, well, we’ve always got CFJs to fix the problem.)

, Although I wonder about the utility of putting the Admin’s actions in parantheses.

No rule says that text in parenthesis are not part of the rules.

I know, but it seems awkward to me. No problem, though.

The Ruleset/Gamestate should automatically be updated to reflect enactment as soon as it happens. The written rules and observed Gamestate may take a little longer to update, but it makes most sense to have the actual Ruleset and Gamestate updated as soon as something passes.

per Qwaz; good point. What we need is for proposals to be enacted the same way as Bucky’s proposal, but the ruleset changes happen instantly, then the admin has to update the online copies of the rules and gamestate accordingly.

Actually, . (This is a CoV only if the amendment proposal passes.)

@qwaz: Your point would be valid is such differences where marked in the ruleset. As the ruleset stands right now, there is no difference between what’s written in the ruleset and what should be.

Whatever, this is merely political voting to make sure Bucky wins instead of me. Otherwise, it makes no sense that players would try to delay a critical core ruleset fix like this one.

“shall” means “must”.  It’s already in the Glossary.

@arth: Of course there is a difference, otherwise I could just go alter everything in the Ruleset right now and it would immediately become the actual Rules.

@spikebrennan: does saying that someone must do something, mean that they can?

“@spikebrennan: does saying that someone must do something, mean that they can?”

I think that the answer is yes, although a rule that states “A Player is permitted to take any Action that a Rule or the Gamestate expressly requires that Player to take” would resolve any doubt.

Gamestate should change upon marking of the post.  End of Story.  The recording thereof may be delayed, but should definitely happen /after/ the post is closed for voting.

You guys managed to have an entire CfJ while I was asleep, which is pretty impressive; what makes it even moreso is that is was about an action that I took. 

And no, arthexis, i’m not voting against this to prevent you from winning, I’m voting against this because it’s a bad proposal

@excalibur: except of course that modifying both at once is a physical impossibility, and that the rule as written now allows me to enact rules in what ever order I wish to.

Please spell my name correctly, arth.

No: the gamestate changes when the proposal is enacted.  The Ruleset as-recorded is then changed to match gamestate.  Easy-peasey.