Harrison, Andrew on 13 Oct 2000 08:43:51 -0000

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

RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: proposal recognition

> From: Joel Uckelman [mailto:uckelman@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Um, that depends on whether P311/1 actually passed (see 
> several of the 
> outstanding RFJ's). We'll see, I guess.

Ok, I've obviously missed something here. I saw all the RFJ's that XnJester
but missed the actual point of them all. Looking back now I see that he is
questioning if the issues on this weeks ballot were correct. I would say
that the ballot was the contents of Joels email. The rules state that "The
Administrator shall, prior to the close of voting each nweek, distribute to
all Players the Ballot for that nweek." Therefore, what Joel distributed was
the ballot. We've already seen that when an official action is taken it is
binding, even if it is quite clearly wrong (i.e. the ruling on RFJ13), and I
wouldn't have said the ballot was clearly wrong.
The ballot was distributed, the issues were voted on, quorum was reached,
the Administrator declared the results and recognised the addition of three
new rules. It all happened:

Rule 113:
Actions occur upon reaching the appropriate Fora. Non-action events--i.e.,
events not caused by Agent--occur at exactly the times specified in the
Rules. Events may occur only in the present, and may not alter the past.

The judgements that have been submitted cannot alter what has happened, only
guide future interpretation of the Rules:

Rule 124:
A Judgment shall guide interpretation of the Rules until such time as a
subsequent Judgment contradicts it. A Judge reversing or modifying past
precedent shall provide in eir analysis justification for doing so.

The Kid