Wednesday, August 08, 2018

Proposal: Shred 2.0

Times out 2-4. Failed by pokes.

Adminned at 10 Aug 2018 10:11:20 UTC

Make a new rule titled “Strike-out” with the text

An author of a pending proposal may Strike-out certain sections of their proposal, which are ignored during enactment. An author Strikes-out a section by commenting “STRIKE-OUT X” on the relevant proposal, where X is a comma separated list of the number for each section to be ignored. A Proposal is divided up into numbered sections according to the following guidelines:
* A section which appear inside of another section are not numbered and therefore can’t be Stricken-out separately from their parent section.
* text which is clearly intended to be put into the ruleset, such as being inside of blockquote tags or quotes, is not considered when examining the proposal for words that affect the ruleset.
* For these guidelines, the variables X, Y and Z stand for text which matches the criteria of the first bullet point.
* conditionals affecting proposed changes to the ruleset are a section.
* text similar to the following forms “replace X with Y”, “add to rule Y X”, “make a new rule X with Y”, “append to X Y”, “repeal X”, “remove X from the ruleset”, “in X change Y to Z”
If an author’s first line of their proposal contains only the text “on strike”, they cannot strike-out any sections of that proposal. If an author makes a comment consisting of only the text “ON STRIKE”, that proposal may not have any more sections stricken-out.

the shred proposal came in handy a few times last dynasty, maybe a more general purpose one would be helpful?

Comments

Kevan:

08-08-2018 11:46:07 UTC

against Lots of potential for surprise scams that remove a chunk at the last minute, here. Card shredding worked because cards were independent from each other, or would be obvious if they weren’t. This isn’t the case for proposal chunks.

Axemabaro:

08-08-2018 15:06:50 UTC

against

derrick:

08-08-2018 15:54:10 UTC

for

pokes:

08-08-2018 20:39:12 UTC

against per Kevan; plus, I don’t want to have to consider, in the presence of N chunks, the worst-case scenario among 2^N last-minute redactions

Kevan:

08-08-2018 22:08:35 UTC

Interesting to consider whether “enact the following clause unless the proposer says KEYWORD in comments” should become the new “enact if a quorum of EVCs include KEYWORD”, though - it seemed useful for letting the proposer clearly negotiate conditional votes, last dynasty.

pokes:

08-08-2018 22:15:28 UTC

That’s a point solidifying my against that the striking out can be done on an a la carte basis within each proposal, with no need to codify it in the ruleset.

Trigon:

08-09-2018 12:30:34 UTC

Way too easily scammable. against