[Nomic] Rule five part 2

[Adam Biltcliffe]

On Sep 28 2004, David (Birch) wrote:

> > I propose the following rule to replace my earlier proposal: 
> 
> Rule five.
>  
> Once the stupid notice of consensus for now this rule is issued 
> eventually, new rules passed stand, providing, however, every fifth word 
> (not including words in the email title) is considered not ignored, to 
> exist if the Akanomic rule contains the word I "rule" in its title. 
> Remember, This rule only applies blindly to itself and rules not 
> containing higher numbers than three it.

Comprehending this is making my mind hurt. I see the intent, but is there 
not an awkward issue with the fact that this rule as it stands it a load of 
gobbledegook, which is only resolved if the rule is considered to apply to 
itself in the form obtained by applying it to itself? In other words, it's 
a reverse paradox.

adam