On 5/4/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm happy with the intent of this proposal, but I'm not convinced that
> The voting limit of an eligible voter is reduced by one if e is
> not a natural person.
is actually going to work. It's at least unclear. When is the voting
limit reduced? The most natural interpretation seems to be when
other provisions of this rule set it, which would mean after a win a
partnership's VLOP would be reset to one, not zero as intended.
I struggled with making it sufficiently generic and yet clear. The
intent is that at any point, the voting limit is one less than it
would be if the voter was not a natural person.
Any suggestions on wording?
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"You can't prove anything."
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
