Even though it wasn't set then, it would've been set to that [Along with the Elections started by nichdel that I still need to resolve]
I'm going to just assume Quorum is 4 for these decisions as there's no reason to act otherwise. On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:07 PM Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote: > nttpf. > > And Quorum, by the rules right now, for this proposal, would be 4 as > that's the reflection of the Assessor's resolution of proposals on the 24th > of May > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:05 PM Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> > wrote: > >> On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 23:55 +0000, Quazie wrote: >> > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:58 PM Aris Merchant < >> > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran >> > > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal >> > > pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, and the >> > > valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote). >> > > >> > > >> ID Author(s) AI Title Pender Pend fee >> > > (sh.) >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > 7858* Gaelan 3.0 Fast Resolution, now working ais523 N/A >> [1] >> > > >> > > >> > >> > I vote AGAINST. >> > >> > I note that only 3 votes have been placed on proposal 7858, and only 2 >> of >> > which were within the original time frame, which has been extended now >> to >> > 14 days. >> > >> > As such it would be FAILED QUORUM, but instead i SHAME EVERYONE (other >> than >> > o and Veggiekeks) including myself [Wow that's a weird shall] for not >> > voting during the original time frame. It's our duty, fulfil our >> duties! >> > DUTIES! >> >> Err, what *is* the quorum on that proposal right now, anyway? The >> quorum rules were amended recently, so that quorum is defined at the >> start of the voting period rather than instantaneously; but the quorum >> value for the proposal never ended up getting set. >> >> In any case, just in case my vote is needed, I vote AGAINST. Although >> I'm curious as to the theoretical question as to what quorum is, I >> suggest we try to ratify a reasonable quorum value onto the Agoran >> Decision in question (possibly via its resolution, or possibly via >> RWO). >> >> -- >> ais523 >> >
