[Nomic] Rule five part 2

[Adam Biltcliffe]

On Sep 28 2004, David (Birch) wrote:

> Well, I could argue that no earlier rules contain large numbers, so we 
> could just not revise them in that way. However, If you're still bothered 
> by it, I'll revise that into the wording after collating objections. I'd 
> quite like to pass this. it's fun to play with.

If you're revising it, you could just making the numbering condition apply 
specifically to the rule number rather than any number contained in the 
rule.

adam