On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 23:50:33 +0100 ais523 <callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-10-22 at 12:10 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > Other note: A fair thing to do would be to hold an election. But > > election for ADoP is resolved by ADoP - a problem! We actually > > used to have "separation of powers" for this, something that read: > > > > "In the case that the election is for the office of ADoP, the > > vote collector is instead [other officer]". > > > > Probably should bring that back! > > We also used to have pairs of offices that couldn't be held > simultaneously by the same person. Currently we have one such pair, > Prime Minister and Speaker (these are described as "incompatible" in > rule 103 which is not defined in the ruleset, but the very next > sentence gives a mechanism via which the exclusion can occur). I don't see why the office responsible for resolving ADoP elections needs to be incompatible with ADoP. -- aranea
