The last clause is an admin headache, since it requires the admin enacting any proposal to check any other recently enacted proposals to make sure none of them Opposed the one they’re working on.

I thought when reading the Proposal that the second line might just be a sad necessity (even though it allows Proposals to fail other Pending Proposals), but I also don’t want to make life impossible for the admins.

Proposals can already essentially do this, but per Bucky, I don’t think it’s something we want to necessarily encourage.

Bucky’s concern only needs an “and should be failed immediately” or “and the enacting admin should leave a comment on that proposal to that effect” clause, I think.

This does seem like a shorthand that it might be useful to have in some form for this dynasty - our usual “if flawed proposal X passed, repeal the rule it added and do this instead” becomes tricky when it’s possible for proposal X to pass after the one we’re writing.

:DEF:

By which I mean

Suppose we like the idea of Proposal A but prefer the implementation of Opposing Proposal B. If A passes before B, B is failed and we’re then left with the inferior rule.