On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kerim Aydin<ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > Hmm, there's two possible ways an incorrect election notice can be VALID. > (1) It can be VALID in initiating an election, even though it's incorrect > in some specified detail; but the platonic "correct" information governed in > the rules is what really happened (e.g. its really only first-class players > who were eligible), or (2) it can be VALID and the incorrect information can > overrule the platonic state. We've tended towards (1) in general, except > when (2) involves something that has ratified; any particular reason for > favoring (2) here? The court case you mention doesn't seem to quite cover > it unless I'm misreading it. Just curious as to your thoughts because IMO > it's a bit of a (not necessarily wrong) shift. -G.
Consider another hypothetical situation: A player who is not the IADoP purports to initiate an Agoran Decision to choose the holder of an office, and this isn't challenged. E later resolves the decision, and the resolution self ratifies. It was IMPOSSIBLE for em to initiate the decision if e wasn't the IADoP, but he did initiate it. Does this mean that e was the IADoP at the time of the initiation, and if so, is e still IADoP if no one else has been installed as IADoP in that time?
