Saturday, June 27, 2020

Timed out and passed, 5-1. Josh

Adminned at 29 Jun 2020 08:16:40 UTC

Add a keyword, “Tag”:

A Post may have any number of tags applied to it using the WordPress interface. A Rule may have any number of tags applied to it. Rule tags are represented by appending to their title a comma-separated list of such tags, enclosed in square brackets.

Add a keyword, “Introduction”:

The introduction of a rule is the part of that rule’s text before any subrules.

Amend the Votable Matters Rule “Tags” so that it reads:

Votable Matters must have the tag/s “Core”, “Special Case” and/or “Appendix” to amend the Core Rules, the Special Case Rules and/or the Appendix, respectively.

Votable Matters other than [[#Victory and Ascension|DoVs]] require the tag “Victory” in order to grant victory to a Designer.

Amend the last two bullet points of the rule “Names” so they read:

  • When referring to a Proposal, the name used in reference to a specific Proposal may be simplified by not including any valid representation of a tag or tags. i.e. a Proposal named “Changes [Core]” could instead be referred to by the name “Changes”.
  • When referring to a Rule, the name used in reference to a specific Rule may be simplified by not including any valid representation of a tag or tags, and, in the case of Special Case Rules, any asterisks, as long as such a reference would be unambiguous.

Amend the first paragraph of the rule “Special Case” so that it reads:

Special Case Rules can be Active or Inactive. A Special Case Rule should be tagged with its status. Otherwise, its status is its Default Status.

Add a rule, “Tags Stopgap”, replacing CURRENTTIME with the time this Proposal is Enacted:

If an open Votable Matter posted before CURRENTTIME has, in its title, any of the strings “[Core]”, “[Special Case]”, “[Appendix]” or “[Victory]”, then those strings are considered to be valid representations of the tags “Core”, “Special Case”, “Appendix” or “Victory”, respectively. If no such Votable Matters exist, repeal this rule.

7 Responses

  1. Josh says:

    :against: Just because I honestly kinda hate the tags system and would prefer that it was just repealled altogether. If it must exist then many of these are sensible fixes. I’m not completely sure about “Introduction” – at best it strikes me as something that doesn’t really need defining – but the rest seems okay.

  2. Tantusar says:

    Introduction is a hold over from earlier in the drafting process before I realised I only needed to fix one line in Special Case.

  3. :for:

  4. pokes says:

    :def: — I don’t know enough about the WordPress interface to know if this is reasonable, but the Emperor will!

  5. Amnistar says:

    Is there a purpose to using tags other than to broadcast what the changes are about? If not then this feels like an unnecessary level of cumbersome to require tags be used.

    1. Tantusar says:

      This isn’t technically introducing a new requirement. Tags have been required in titles for the listed rules amendments on the EE version for some time. This Proposal transitions that requirement to more intuitively use the WordPress interface for tags.

      This Proposal will not make tags any more or less required than they already were. Repealing the requirement would be a question for another Proposal.

      1. Amnistar says:

        I’ve been away for awhile, if this already a requirement and were just moving the language to match the current tools then I see no problem.

  6. Amnistar says:

    :for: per above conversation.

  7. :for: I’ve been planning to suggest this, though I strongly question the existing requirement as well.

Comments are closed.