Monday, February 09, 2009

Proposal: Specific over vague

Cannot pass with 12 votes against. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Feb 2009 14:05:03 UTC

Add the following to the Glossary:

In cases of conflict between two rules, the more specific rule takes precedence over the less specific rule.

posted by Klisz at 09 Feb 2009 06:03:01 UTC Comments (14)

Comments

Hix:

09-02-2009 06:08:54 UTC

against Case-by-case

Darknight: he/him

09-02-2009 06:12:57 UTC

against

Rodlen:

09-02-2009 06:36:00 UTC

against

Qwazukee:

09-02-2009 06:44:26 UTC

against

arthexis: he/him

09-02-2009 07:07:36 UTC

against

Kevan: Yard he/him

09-02-2009 11:27:09 UTC

But are there any cases where this wouldn’t echo the “common sense” we’ve been using so far?

Sparrow:

09-02-2009 12:36:14 UTC

Although I do think this is the basic rule we follow, I think it is an integral part of how the English language is interpreted and does not need to be stated outright anymore than the unspoken rules for parsing an English sentence. When there are disagreements on how an English sentence is interpreted, you make a CfJ. I don’t see any difference here.

Wooble:

09-02-2009 13:44:57 UTC

imperial

ais523:

09-02-2009 17:09:14 UTC

imperial

Devenger:

09-02-2009 19:35:42 UTC

against dangerously misinterpretable - a system of ‘levels’ for all concepts introduced by rules would be required to have a non ‘common sense’ based definition of what is ‘more specific’.

Amnistar: he/him

10-02-2009 00:52:57 UTC

against

Gnauga:

10-02-2009 01:13:45 UTC

against

Wooden Squid:

10-02-2009 17:53:56 UTC

against

dogfish:

10-02-2009 18:24:00 UTC

against