Thursday, August 16, 2012

Proposal: Proper Pie Points Heading

sked—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Aug 2012 21:15:00 UTC

If the proposal “Become a Master Baker” passes, give the title “Pie Points Victory” to the subrule it adds.

Just for neatness’ sake.

Comments

Murphy:

08-16-2012 03:37:51 UTC

for

quirck:

08-16-2012 07:57:43 UTC

for

quirck:

08-16-2012 08:02:18 UTC

GreyWithAnE already had 2 pending proposals at the time this one was submitted, though. So strictly speaking, it is illegal. On the other hand, if GreyWithAnE was an admin, he could fail “pie tie defense” and then this proposal would become legal. So I’m inclined not to mark this illegal, though please be careful in the future :)

GreyWithAnE:

08-16-2012 12:14:09 UTC

Understood.  I was under the impression that we could have 3 proposals open, though (that was why I posted this one).

Cpt_Koen:

08-16-2012 14:13:31 UTC

for Though technically, “Become a Master Baker” adds two subrules: “Winning Conditions” is a subrule to 2 Dynastic Rules, and “Unnamed rule” is a subrule to Winning Conditions.

I can’t find where in the ruleset it states that when a Proposal contains an inconsistent rule change, that rule change doesn’t apply. Has this been deleted?

moonroof:

08-16-2012 14:40:10 UTC

for

GreyWithAnE:

08-16-2012 22:37:03 UTC

against This proposal no longer matters because the Master Baker one is self-killed.

But how was this inconsistent?

Cpt_Koen:

08-17-2012 16:38:03 UTC

Well “Become a Master Baker” adds two subrules, thus “give the title “Pie Points Victory” to the subrule it adds.” doesn’t work.

GreyWithAnE:

08-17-2012 18:46:29 UTC

Master Baker doesn’t add two subrules.  It adds one rule (“Winning Conditions”), and one subrule (the unnamed one).  Winning Conditions was left empty (except for the subrule), in order to invite other players to add more Winning Conditions as additional subrules.

GreyWithAnE:

08-17-2012 18:54:16 UTC

Unless “subrule” means something other than what I think it means.  Is this not the case?

2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 are all rules

2.3.1 is a subrule to 2.3

Cpt_Koen:

08-17-2012 19:07:18 UTC

From the Appendix, 3.1:

Rule
Each individually numbered section of the ruleset is a rule, including sections that are sub-rules of other rules.

Subrule
A subrule is a type of rule that is nested within another rule. A proposal that specifically affects a rule affects all of its subrules; a proposal that specifically affects a subrule does not affect its parent rule or any other subrule of that rule, unless they are also explicitly cited as being affected by that proposal.

Therefore section 2 Dynastic Rules is a rule, sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 are rules and subrules to section 2, and section 2.3.1 is a rule and a subrule to 2.3.

GreyWithAnE:

08-17-2012 22:45:20 UTC

Excellent.  Thanks much, Captain.