Gavin Doig on 29 Jan 2002 13:08:01 -0000

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

spoon-discuss: Re: Proosal

> <proosal>
> <title>You can't even see.</title>
> <body>
> Amend rule 212, if it exists, by
> replacing "three" with "5".
> [[If 266 fails, at least we'll have an 
> alternative.]]
> </body>
> </proosal>
> uin.
> I repeal rule 10!
It's now been (over) an nweek since I performed the above actions. Therefore, they are considered to be legal (by rule 129), and rule 10 is no more (or possibly has been no more since then, but it doesn't matter at the moment which).

Possible reasons for this to fail:
CFJ136 - not relevant, as that CFJ was submitted and judged *before* the statute kicked in.
R152 - it *is* permitted by the rules (specifically, r129 permits it).
The fact that my action came after my signature - there's nothing to prohibit this, and we have the precedent of the admin recognising my point transfers of yesterday, which also came after my sig. What a convenient coincidence ;-)


Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at

Win a ski trip!