Monday, January 25, 2021

Proposal: No Privilege Escallation

At 8-1, is 48 hours old and is not Popular. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 27 Jan 2021 21:27:21 UTC

Append the following to the second paragraph of the rule “Treaties [Universal]”:

A Treaty cannot amend, or authorize any amendment to, any rule except for itself and its non-Universal subrules. A Treaty cannot overrule this paragraph under any circumstances.

Comments

pokes:

25-01-2021 20:55:01 UTC

I’m not sure the last sentence does anything while interacting with Prioritisation in the Appendix. Does “This treaty can overrule Treaties [Universal] on Tuesdays” count as more limited scope?

Raven1207: he/him

25-01-2021 20:55:16 UTC

for

pokes:

25-01-2021 20:58:39 UTC

OK, now I’m not even sure that, say, “This Rule may not be overruled by Dynastic Rules.” in CfJ core is actually true. If we gave the Dynastic rules their own Appendix that claims that Dynastic rules have more power than Core, who’s to say which really has more power? Sure, the consensus would surely be that core takes precedent because we all like it more. But like, what’s even real, man

Bucky:

25-01-2021 21:00:35 UTC

Yeah, it looks like the appendix doesn’t make any allowance for specific statements of precedence among Dynastic rules.

Bucky:

25-01-2021 21:02:45 UTC

The CfJ clause, though, is covered in the second bullet point’s “unless that Core Rule explicitly says it can’t be overruled by a Dynastic Rule” which might be missing the implied “in which case the Core Rule has precedence”.

pokes:

25-01-2021 21:04:46 UTC

Maybe a better way of getting at what I’m getting at is: let’s say that the Dynastic rules were the same as Core, but with the terms ‘Dynastic’ and ‘Core’ swapped. Who’s the boss, really?

pokes:

25-01-2021 21:07:38 UTC

(Is it that we’ve all already agreed to play Core, and continuity of that would make Core the boss? Whew, so much for that existential crisis.)

Josh: he/him

25-01-2021 21:07:43 UTC

for but pokes is right that the last paragraph will need to be strengthened.

pokes:

25-01-2021 21:11:31 UTC

for

Kevan: Oracle he/him

25-01-2021 21:58:07 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 22:04:33 UTC

for

Jumble:

25-01-2021 22:22:13 UTC

for

Brendan: he/him

25-01-2021 22:29:22 UTC

against This is really more like a filibuster than a veto, isn’t it?

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 22:36:21 UTC

Its a long term veto. It can’t fast fail things like a normal veto does—were the queue to reach this point we would have to wait the full 48 hours in order to fail it. However, at that point the proposal would not be popular and thus would fail.

Also (somewhat fortunately) unlike a normal veto, if you switch your vote to FOR the against vote doesn’t stick and the proposal can still pass.

Darknight: he/him

25-01-2021 22:47:14 UTC

for

Coderblaze:

25-01-2021 23:14:29 UTC

for

Josh: he/him

26-01-2021 17:17:20 UTC

CoV against