Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 56 RESULTS

[SkArcher <SkArcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:05:25 -0000, SkArcher <SkArcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:59:23 -0600, Baron von Skippy <bvs@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> wrote:
>
> > > Proposal 1770/0 (Once More, With Less Suckage) (Baron von Skippy):
> > > AFF: Baron von Skippy x2, bd, Mikie The Inscrutable, The Pusher Robot, 
> > > Zarpint
> > > NEG: Glotmorf, Sagitta, SkArcher x3, Teucer, Wonko
> > > Counts (Y/N/A/S) : (6-6-0-0). Measure fails. Baron von Skippy loses 3 
> > > points.
> > -Two things. The first is one of SkArcher's "NO" votes. The other is 
> > his other one. There were only two - one of them was shuffled off to 
> > proposal 1757.-
>
> actually, I still say it wasn't, as my mail to -business was late. I 
> intend to CFI, because I damn well don't want this daft prop of yours to 
> become rule, even if it means CFIing my own votes.

Actually, having looked at it, I cannot find any rule which gives the 
Administrator the right to recognize votes on -discuss. As my votes on 
-business were late, I respectfully submit to the administrator that my 
last alteration to the vote allocation was late, and has therefore not 
taken place. This means that I have voted 3 times on p1770, which 
therefore fails.

If you can point to a rule that says otherwise, i'd be interested, but I 
think we repealed it...



SkArcher
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss