Joel Uckelman on 12 Oct 2000 19:22:05 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Judgement on RFJ 22

It's not a problem. Email addresses aren't regulated by the rules, so the 
first one was good.

Quoth Matthew G Potter:
> Fun with sent the judgement out on my not-listed-in-Nomic email 
> address.  Since I didn't sign it, it might not be 'official.'  This one is 
> being sent out on my mpotter@iastate account, and I'm signing it, so if the 
> first one 'didn't happen' since it wasn't officially by a player, this one 
> will be official.  This is identical to the first.
> >On the matter of RFJ 22, "Motions requiring a vote introduced during an 
> >nweek's voting will not become Ballot Issues," I rule False.
> >
> >According to Rule 110/0, "Voting on a nweek's Ballot opens at the start of 
> >the eighth day of that nweek, and closes at the end of the tenth day of 
> >that nweek."  The voting period lies entirely within the nweek during 
> >which the proposals on that ballot were made; and the termination of the 
> >voting period is concurrent with the end of its nweek.
> >
> >Rule 201/0 states that, prior to the end of the voting period, the 
> >Adminstrator shall "distribute to all Players the Ballot for that nweek. 
> >Each nweek's Ballot shall list all Ballot Issues for the nweek."  This 
> >rule may seem to imply that only proposals initiated or activated during 
> >the current nweek are eligible for the ballot, but it does not explicitly 
> >make the point.  Also, there exists precedence, in rule 227/0, for 
> >proposals active in one nweek to remain active into the next nweek.  So, 
> >it would appear that it is possible for an active proposal to remain 
> >active into subsequent nweeks, though this can only occur through specific 
> >instances outlined in the Ruleset, from dirty pool by the Administrator, 
> >or by an undesirable coincidence of timing and Ruleset semantics.
> >
> >The requirements for a Rule to be included in a ballot are given in Rule 
> >202/0.  The first is "Proposals then active," which includes all active 
> >proposals, regardless of how they came to be active.  This requirement is 
> >not explicitly limited or modified by other rules.
> >
> >Rule 222/0 states that all proposals are live, unless they are declared 
> >dead.  A proposal can only become dead by being voted on in a weekly 
> >Ballot, or by being withdrawn.  All live rules are active unless they have 
> >been deactivated by their owners, according to rule 221/0.  This rule does 
> >not explicitly deactivate proposals which are active prior to the issuing 
> >of the Ballot, but not included in the Ballot and not voted on.  Thus, 
> >proposals remain active--and as such, eligible for the ballot--until they 
> >are withdrawn, deactivated, or voted upon.
> >
> >As such, proposals made or activated after the issuing of a Ballot, but 
> >before the end of an nweek, remain active into the subsequent 
> >nweek.  Since the Ballot for the following nweek includes all active 
> >proposals, and does not exclude proposals that 'should' have been voted on 
> >in previous weeks, they are eligible for that Ballot and should be voted 
> >on.  I rule False.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Potter


Play Nomic!