Thursday, June 03, 2010

Proposal: The Scientific Method

Self-killed (also vetoed)
Failed by Hix

Adminned at 04 Jun 2010 09:14:33 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule entitled “Experimental Rules” and give it the following text:

Some rules are experimental rules. Some experimental rules are final. No core rule may be an experimental rule.

A rule is an experimental rule if, and only if, it contains one of the following sentences:
1:“This is an experimental rule.”
or
2:“This is a final experimental rule.”

An experimental rule is final if, and only if, it contains sentence two from above.

If any non-final experimental rule exists at the beginning of a dynasty, it becomes final. If any final experimental rule exists at the beginning of a dynasty, then it becomes a core rule and thus, non-experimental and non-final.
No rule may be created as a final experimental rule.

This is an experimental rule.

The proposals for core rule changes got me thinking that there should be a way to make trial changes to the core rules.

posted by lilomar at 03 Jun 2010 18:49:32 UTC Comments (15)

Comments

Klisz:

03-06-2010 19:04:21 UTC

imperial

Hix:

03-06-2010 19:54:10 UTC

against

Bucky:

03-06-2010 19:57:29 UTC

against .  Among other objections, it is ambiguous whether a final experimental rule can be repealed on ascension.

lilomar:

03-06-2010 20:01:34 UTC

It’s not ambiguous, a final experimental rule is a dynastic rule, and can, therefore, be repealed per 1.9

lilomar:

03-06-2010 20:07:12 UTC

Or, more specifically, a final experimental rule is not a core rule, so if it is also not a dynastic rule, then whatever rule created the type of rule that that rule is, should specify whether or not it may be repealed.

Anonyman:

03-06-2010 20:11:20 UTC

for

Put:

03-06-2010 20:21:13 UTC

imperial

Jumblin McGrumblin:

03-06-2010 20:55:22 UTC

against Not a big fan of implementing core rules without explicitly making a proposal to do so.

Hix:

03-06-2010 21:07:34 UTC

Just so everyone understands the consequences, note that a new dynasty begins immediately upon a DoV’s passing, but the new emperor doesn’t get a chance to repeal until e makes eir AA, and the (final) experimental rules have already auto-upgraded.

Oh, and how are we supposed to resolve the contradiction between “A rule is an experimental rule if, and only if…” and “No core rule may be an experimental rule.”?  I mean, final experimental rules that auto-place themselves into the core rules will still have “This is a(n) (final) experimental rule” in it.

Oh, and when an experimental rule is auto-upgraded to a final rule, how is the contradiction with the requirement that it contain a certain sentence resolved?

etc.

s/k or veto requested

Klisz:

03-06-2010 21:10:12 UTC

veto per Hix.

Aquafraternally Yours:

03-06-2010 21:20:11 UTC

against  not as eloquent as I’d hope from an important mechanics rule

Freezerbird:

03-06-2010 22:41:26 UTC

Agree with Hix. By the way, shouldn’t the words “Voter and Returning Officer” in the third-to-last para of 1.9 be reading “@ and RNG” by now?

lilomar:

04-06-2010 03:05:19 UTC

mea culpa, Ia dashed that out way too fast. A token against .
If people like the idea, however, I will try to work up a cleaner, tighter, version.

Narya:

04-06-2010 05:16:48 UTC

I think the idea is fine, but it will take a lot of work to get a good proposal. You should probably discuss it in an unofficial post before proposing again.

Rules geekery: this proposal would be a final experimental rule, despite its own prohibition against rules being enacted as such.

Klisz:

04-06-2010 14:55:26 UTC

As for the latter paragraph of your comment, Narya, see the second bullet point of rule 3.2.2.