This gives any citizen who would be moved by a proposal veto power over that proposal, since they can update their Goal at any time, including after the edit window has closed or immediately prior to adminning the proposal.

How about something like “If the enactment of a proposal would update a Citizen’s floor and that citizen has a valid vote of AGAINST on that proposal, the proposal, if enacted, instead has no effect on that particular citizen’s floor.”

Fair point, Zack, I’ve updated the wording per your suggestion.

If a proposal would cause a Citizen to be Endangered or moved to the infirmary, which is very possible if either of these proposal passes (https://blognomic.com/archive/danger_and_harm https://blognomic.com/archive/punks_dont_follow_rules), then they can opt out of experiencing those effects on this wording. At least if I’m reading it right.

I like the idea of this but Tara has a point, I’m on the fence

I tap the “Proposals are discouraged from referencing Goals directly” sign.

Well I was hoping the proposal would be amended in time but I’ll have to vote against on this basis, although I almost wish it would pass because it seems fun to exploit.

Kevan, are you saying that my commentary box text was inappropriate? I understood the sign in question to mean things along the lines of “don’t write a proposal that says ‘give everyone their current Goal.’”

It’s a second-order sign tap: a proposal to enact a rule that references the contents of Goals directly will still (as this one does) create timing issues. The commentary text is fine.

Withdrawn.