Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Call for Judgment: Parenthesis are not Brackets

Fails 10-0 -arth

Adminned at 21 Oct 2009 13:23:24 UTC

Change rule “Team Rules” so that where it reads “A rule is owned by a Team if it contains the name of a Team in brackets as part of its title.”, instead it reads:

A rule is owned by a Team if it contains the name of a Team in parenthesis as part of its title. Those parenthesis and the text inside are not considered part of the rule’s title when the rule is referred to.

And make it so that it has retroactively read like that since the rule was first created.

Otherwise, we have all been screwing up with the ruleset illegally.



10-20-2009 19:52:33 UTC



10-20-2009 20:05:25 UTC

against as per rule 2.2.5


10-20-2009 20:08:23 UTC

against Indeed.


10-20-2009 20:39:13 UTC

against Per 2.2.5.

Even so, parentheses are just a subset of brackets, at least in UK English. (“bracket (n.) each of a pair of marks ( ) [ ] { } < > used to enclose words or figures” from the OED.)


10-20-2009 21:00:04 UTC

(On the subject of breaking the rules, was the “It’s all arthexis’ fault” admin message on “Public Domain Leakage” from Arthexis, or from the proposer Bucky? An admin “must also mark his name”, but this is a bit too ambiguous.)


10-20-2009 23:10:41 UTC

against Per 2.2.5 and the OED.


10-20-2009 23:27:40 UTC

against This Meta has gotten all confusing and, quite honestly, stupid.


10-21-2009 00:28:49 UTC

CoV then against


10-21-2009 00:52:43 UTC

@Kevan: That was my comment, referencing the fact that arthexis’ speed limit both indirectly held up one of my proposals (due to several players strategically stalling Maximum Effect) and required another of my proposal slots (two now) to clean up.

Ienpw III:

10-21-2009 01:42:09 UTC



10-21-2009 02:11:53 UTC

against  per 2.2.5; however, in my local subdialect of US English, “bracket” can mean [ ] or < >, but not ( ) (which are called parentheses and are separate from the definition of “bracket”), an also not { } (which are called braces and also separate).


10-21-2009 02:24:47 UTC


Ienpw III:

10-21-2009 02:27:06 UTC

2.2.5 doesn’t exist.


10-21-2009 05:42:24 UTC

That’s what happens when people take rules out without being careful.  it’s now 2.2.4


10-21-2009 06:09:09 UTC

1 more againts vote is needed to fail this


10-21-2009 15:24:43 UTC