I disagree with that interpretation but *shrug* I’m not against adding this.

Could maybe say “term” instead of “word”, here, for pedantry’s sake. Not sure how I feel about the loophole, but I appreciate you dropping it into the big metal bin.

Thanks - changed

Line-by-line check looks good, just a little odd in a couple of places for plainly-written examples being rephrased into something we’d never actually type (“two days after this Votable Matter enacts…” ,“a Votable Matter proposing that enacted Votable Matters earn their author a banana…”).

This also raises the weighty question of why two unrelated examples are both invoking bananas.

The only concern I have is this one:

> If the Admin enacting a Proposal reaches a step which cannot be applied immediately (e.g. “two days after this Proposal enacts, Citizen A gains 1 point”), that step is ignored for the purposes of enactment. Once a Proposal has been enacted, it can have no further direct effect on the gamestate.

might there be situtations where we want a CfJ to have effects that are not applied immediately? I’m not sure. I can’t think of any but it seems like maybe its a useful tool to have in the back pocket.

I can’t think of any that we couldn’t also achieve by having that CfJ enact a rule of “do a thing, but not immediately, then repeal this rule”.