I recommend a Green Card, on the basis that e was both a new player and new to the office.
-Aris On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, good point. Sorry about this mess. I believe ATMunn still violated > SHALLs and therefore I point my finger at em for failure to state the > quorum. > > On 11/05/2017 09:01 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: >> If no rule says it's an essential parameter, it isn't an essential >> parameter. There's no reason to read that into the quorum rule. R107 >> states that the initiation must include "any additional information >> defined by the rules as essential parameters", I see no such >> definition here. >> >> >> -Aris >> >> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think quorum is an essential parameter, given the SHALL requirement >>> associated with it. >>> >>> On 11/05/2017 08:52 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: >>>> On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 at 20:50 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >>>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sorry about this. CoE: Quorum was not specified on the first Agoran >>>> Decision, therefore neither decision was initiated. >>>> >>>> I wish I had noticed this earlier, but I was starting to count the >>>> votes >>>> and went to check quorum and saw that it was missing. Unfortunately, I >>>> think this means that you can never intiate this decision because you >>>> CAN only do so in a timely fashion. >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't think that's true. Nothing says that an initiation is invalid >>>> without a quorum. The rules are explicit that an incorrect quorum >>>> invalidates a decision, but even without that, rule 879 is power 2 and >>>> can't override a valid initiation at power 3 I think. >>> -- >>> ---- >>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >>> >>> > > -- > ---- > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > >
