The problem is, by R208 it isn't actually a proposal resolution if it doesn't "provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots."
Note that it's a bit weird - the tally of valid ballots isn't actually what self-ratifies - that's in R2034. So the tally is more platonic, if it was incorrect, the resolution just didn't happen. Technically, I think Alexis CoEs is something like: "CoE: the proposal wasn't resolved as indicated (R2034) because the correct tallies were not published (R208)." So the technically correct response is: 1. "CoE accepted. The proposal wasn't resolved". (that's the corrected document for R2034, saying what was true about the R2034(2) self-resolving quantity at the time). followed by: 2. "I hereby resolve the Decision as..." (document meeting R208 requirements). All that said, this is what's "technically correct" but I personally think what you did was clear enough! On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > I believed it was a revision of the previously published document > because the outcomes were not changed. > > > On 10/22/2017 02:34 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > I spend a shiny to CFJ "In the below-quoted message, PSS resolved an > > Agoran Decision". > > > > Arguments: See also CFJ 3576 about revisions of reports. In this case, > > PSS said e is republishing the below as a revision, but what does that > > mean? With a report, there is no action except for publication, but > > with a decision resolution, there is an action (namely, resolving the > > decisions). Compare and contrast rule 2201, which specifically > > mentions revisions, and rule 208, which sets out conditions for a > > decision resolution. Clearly, PSS's first resolution was wholly > > INVALID with consequences such as invalidating the subsequent claim of > > the reward for resolution. > > > > Is this second one supposed to resolve the decision correctly, or > > merely to correct the previously published document? I argue that this > > is sufficiently unclear as to fail the test required for "by > > announcement", meaning that e does not actually resolve the decision > > in this message. > > > > On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 14:26 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > > <mailto:p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > That is correct. I republish the below as a revision: > > > > > > I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7923-7929 below. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the > > following proposals. For each decision, the options available to > > Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a > > decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately > > before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.] > > > > ID Author(s) AI Title Pender > > Pend fee > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 7923x Gaelan 1.0 Another Economy Fix Attempt Gaelan > > 1 AP > > 7924* Aris, [1] 3.0 Contracts v8 Aris > > 1 sh. > > 7925* Aris, Alexis 3.0 Safety Regulations v2 Aris > > 1 AP > > 7926x Alexis 3.0 Deregulation Alexis > > 1 AP > > 7927* V.J. Rada, G. 2.0 Estate Auction Fix V.J. Rada > > 1 sh. > > 7928* G. 3.0 no we can't G. > > 1 AP > > 7929x V.J. Rada 1.0 Consumerism V.J. Rada > > 1 sh. > > > > > > > > > > | | 7923 | 7924 | 7025 | 7926 | 7927 | 7928 | 7929 | > > |--------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+ > > |Alexis | AA | PP | FF | FF | FF | FF | PP | > > |Aris | A | F | F | A | F | F | A | > > |ATMunn | A | F | F | A | F | F | A | > > |G | A | F | F | F | F | F | A | > > |nichdel | A | F | P | P | F | F | P | > > |PSS | A | F | F | A | F | F | F | > > |Trigon | F | F | P | P | P | P | A | > > |VJ Rada | F | F | F | F | F | F | F | > > |--------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+ > > |F/A | 2/7 | 7/0 | 7/0 | 4/3 | 8/0 | 8/0 | 3/4 | > > |AI | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | > > |V | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | > > |Q | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | > > |P | F | T | T | F | T | T | F | > > > > On 10/22/2017 09:40 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > > > > > CoE: My votes count double as PM > > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 08:31 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, > > > <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > > <mailto:p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> > > > <mailto:p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > > <mailto:p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7923-7929 below. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to > > adopt the > > > following proposals. For each decision, the options > > available to > > > Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). > > If a > > > decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately > > > before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.] > > > > > > ID Author(s) AI Title > > Pender > > > Pend fee > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 7923x Gaelan 1.0 Another Economy Fix Attempt > > Gaelan > > > 1 AP > > > 7924* Aris, [1] 3.0 Contracts v8 > > Aris > > > 1 sh. > > > 7925* Aris, Alexis 3.0 Safety Regulations v2 > > Aris > > > 1 AP > > > 7926x Alexis 3.0 Deregulation > > Alexis > > > 1 AP > > > 7927* V.J. Rada, G. 2.0 Estate Auction Fix V.J. > > Rada > > > 1 sh. > > > 7928* G. 3.0 no we can't G. > > > > > 1 AP > > > 7929x V.J. Rada 1.0 Consumerism V.J. > > Rada > > > 1 sh. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The full text of each adopted proposal is included below. > > > > > > > > > | | 7923 | 7924 | 7025 | 7926 | 7927 | 7928 | 7929 | > > > |--------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+ > > > |Alexis | A | P | F | F | F | F | P | > > > |Aris | A | F | F | A | F | F | A | > > > |ATMunn | A | F | F | A | F | F | A | > > > |G | A | F | F | F | F | F | A | > > > |nichdel | A | F | P | P | F | F | P | > > > |PSS | A | F | F | A | F | F | F | > > > |Trigon | F | F | P | P | P | P | A | > > > |VJ Rada | F | F | F | F | F | F | F | > > > |--------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------+ > > > |F/A | 2/6 | 7/0 | 6/0 | 3/3 | 7/0 | 7/0 | 2/4 | > > > |AI | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | > > > |V | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | > > > |Q | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | > > > |P | F | T | T | F | T | T | F | > > > > > > > > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > ID: 7825 > > > Title: Safety Regulations v2 > > > Adoption index: 3.0 > > > Author: Aris > > > Co-author(s): Alexis > > > > > > > > > Amend Rule 2493, "Regulations", by > > > > > > * Replacing every instance of the word "instrument" with the > > > words "textual > > > entity"; and > > > * Amending the second paragraph to read in full "A regulation > > > must be > > > authorized by at least one rule in order for it to exist. A > > > regulation has > > > effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that > > > authorized it > > > permit it to have effect. If reasonably possible, a > > regulation > > > should be > > > interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for > > > resolving > > > conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules > > > (for the > > > purposes of resolving conflicts only, a regulation is > > treated > > > as if it > > > had the power of its least powerful parent rule)." > > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > ID: 7827 > > > Title: Estate Auction Fix > > > Adoption index: 2.0 > > > Author: V.J. Rada > > > Co-author(s): G. > > > > > > > > > Amend rule 2491 by replacing the text "transfer the auctioned > > > Estate to the winner by announcement, by paying Agora the > > amount of > > > the bid, or by causing the winning Organization" with > > "transfer the > > > auctioned Estate to the winner by announcement and by either > > paying > > > Agora the amount of the bid or causing the winning Organization" > > > > > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > ID: 7828 > > > Title: no we can't > > > Adoption index: 3.0 > > > Author: G. > > > Co-author(s): > > > > > > > > > Amend Rule 2125 (Regulated Actions) by replacing: > > > > > > Restricted Actions CAN only be performed as described by > > the Rules. > > > > > > with: > > > A Restricted Action CAN only be performed as described by the > > > Rules, and only > > > using the methods explicitly specified in the Rules for > > > performing the given > > > action. > > > > > > [this over-arching protection means in general, "by > > announcement" > > > is NOT implied. I just want to put this in place and absolutely > > > clarify the ruleset if it passes, and we can add the MMI > > change later > > > if desired]. > > > > > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > > > > > > > > > >
