Wooble wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> 5637 O1 1 Quazie Agora is my conditional value >> I change my vote to ENDORSE Agora x4 > > I don't think this works; under no circumstances can a rule take > effect before the votes on it are counted, so relying on a definition > that would be created by a rule in a conditional vote should fail > regardless of whether the rule actually passes.
I suspect the intent to use the proposed method as a local definition is reasonably clear. Rule 2127's existing definition of "endorsing" only covers "endorsing another voter", so definitely doesn't apply here. Sgeo wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I thought that ENDORSE Agora was already defined.. I remember seeing >>> it somewhere.. maybe it was in a proto and I got confused and thought >>> that it was in a rule.. >> >> Umm, you saw it in the proposal you're voting on conditionally. >> > > I could have sworn I saw it somewhere else.. Quazie has used a similar local definition in some of eir previous votes, just as some players used the de facto definition of "endorse <player>" before that was legislated.
