| Craig Daniel on Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:19:39 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-b] [s-d] [change] Ballot for nweek 161 - 24 Dec 2009. |
ttpf On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:41 AM, James Baxter <jebaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> No, Objnomic turned it off: >> http://b.nomic.net/index.php?title=Clock_automatic&direction=prev&oldid=11874 >> >> Then you turned it on: >> http://b.nomic.net/index.php?title=Clock_automatic&direction=next&oldid=11873 >> >> Both those events occurred on 24 December, the clock wasn't incremented in between. > > This fixes some things - at least maybe. I CFI on the following > statement: "The purported distribution of a ballot on or about > Rushnight of the current nweek constitutes recognition of all > proposals mentioned." > > Arguments: since it clearly wasn't a valid ballot but did assign > numbers to all the proposals, I think this is clearly TRUE. > > - teucer > _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business