On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-10-16 at 08:54 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
> > And the notice of initiation lacked any set of the valid votes, which
> > I wasn't going to point out but now do. Therefore, the Agoran
> > Decisions were never initiated.
>
> Does pointing it out to a-d count?
>
> I'd recommend an explicit "CoE" to a-b, as the simplest way to give
> certainty about the gamestate. (That is, unless more uncertainty is
> considered a good thing.)
I'm really not sure you can retroactively reconstruct the gamestate like
that, given that it was a perfectly valid announcement when it happened.
If a CFJ is phrased past-tense:
"Was a decision initiated on [date]"
it would pretty clearly be true, to say otherwise is to ratify the
past without actually doing so.
Think of the consequences: if we could do this, we could undo lots of
things that don't self-ratify (e.g. we could change the Winning rules
and say "because you can't Win that way by the rules now, you couldn't
have won that way back then").
