Wooble wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >> I contest this. The office of Historian was repealed by Proposal 6018 >> on December 22. > > Does the fact that the portion of the IADoP's report listing you as > holding the office the last time I published it mean the office still > exists? Either way, the NoV is incorrect since its duties were > repealed.
Presumably that report has self-ratified by now? I don't know that we have any precedent on this, but I think ratifying a claim that contradicts the rules (in this case "Historian is an office") just gets undone by the rules a moment after ratification.
