I had no idea that it was supposed to be a registration attempt until I saw
others discussing it, so I think it’s a stretch to say it was reasonably
{clear, ambiguous}.
Gaelan
> On Oct 22, 2019, at 5:14 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 00:06 +0000, James Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 00:02, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
>> <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> I also become a candidate. Election speech: Has anyone figured out
>>> whether or not I'm a player yet?
>>>
>> As Registrar, I'm assuming you aren't.
>>
>> My reasoning: Your attempted proposal submission might have indicated
>> you intended to become a player, but I don't think it counts as
>> "reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously" (R869) since your
>> intention might also have just been to make us all wonder about it.
>
> AFAICT, it counts as a registration if and only if a) I'm aware of the
> consequences (which I think is fairly easy to establish), and b) I'm
> aware I'm not a player at the time (again, fairly easy given how long
> it's been). The "Right now," was intended as an explicit triggering of
> R869 (last time I did something like this it failed due to uncertainty
> about the timing).
>
> Your reasoning is interesting, though, although if the message had been
> just made with the purpose of confusing people (rather than
> registering), it would have violated rule 2471 for no real benefit,
> something that's very out of character for me.
>
> --
> ais523
>
