| Jamie Dallaire on Sun, 14 Dec 2008 19:11:41 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Impeachment and Recall |
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Warrigal <ihope127+w@xxxxxxxxx<ihope127%2Bw@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Elliott Hird > <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 14 Dec 2008, at 22:12, Warrigal wrote: > >> If we repealed dependent actions, things like "without Objection" > >> would be ambiguous, as the time window for activation wouldn't be > >> specified anywhere. Therefore, repealing dependent actions is worse > >> than saying "with more Supporters than Objections". > > > > so what's the timeout for this thing? > > The timeout for every dependent action is 2 to 4 ndays or, in special > cases, 3 to 5 rdays. There's no reason "with more Supporters than > Objections" would be different. Yep, that's the default timeout. That said I wasn't sure that with more supporters than objections would actually work, given how the dependent actions rule is phrased. I'll revise my proposal later to actually add a provision to support/objections to allow that kind of language. BP _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss