A Modest Proposal - RonO's Ramblings
Fun to think about, but it won't pass. And even if it did, you get around the 6.6.y restriction by first repealing it, which merely lengthens the total process from two years to four.
Substantively, I think it is a bad idea because Article 3 covers a lot of ground, so if you discover something that really should be dealt with now, you may be enjoined from doing anything about it because of a pending amendment to something completely unrelated.
The main reason I oppose such proposals is because they fundamentally say to me, "I don't like democracy and want to make it harder for other members to participate." The way you deal with the various Hugo proposals you oppose is to oppose them, not try to change the rules so you can go to sleep for five or ten years.
But from a technical point of view, you would IMO be better served by saying that the introduction of such proposals as you want to ban shall not be in order. I'm just thinking of the mechanics of it. For instance, back in 1994 there was a proposal that said, "No amendment that has the effect of increasing the number of Hugo Award categories above ___ shall be in order." That is, you aren't even allowed to introduce it.