On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> Given that if e'd put the rule in, we would have accused em of trying >> to ratify a scam or something, I'd say all these fall into "dammed if >> e does, dammed if e doesn't", in other words, R1504(e). -G. > > The Ruleset doesn't self-ratify and can't be ratified without > Objection. Adding a rule (possibly with a "disputed" disclaimer) > wouldn't violate the rules.
Sorry, I meant that we'd accuse em of being misleading. -G.
