On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > The real question is if we can successfully prosecute either pikhq or > BobTHJ for not assigning prerogatives; each of them has a fairly good > case for UNAWARE (although obviously BobTHJ's is a bit stronger, since > as far as anyone can tell e didn't know e was Speaker until after e > wasn't anymore).
The amount of time between when the Proposal made BobTHJ speaker and when e ceased to be speaker is far shorter than what we've considered reasonable for requiring someone to become aware of something, especially as the results themselves were rather delayed and not predictable in timing. pikhq's on-hold status is more interesting, how informed is an on-hold person expected to stay about events? Not very I'd say in this case, though I'd say differently for an elected position. Note: above discussion is theoretical: not advocating an actual case be raised, I wouldn't penalize these anymore than I'd penalize a CotC for being a day or two late at something. (Also, allowing "a day or two late" to generally slide is part of the Agoran custom argument for allowing the CAN to persist). -Goethe
