On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Ed Murphy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Proposal: Deputised duties go away
> (AI = 3, please)
>
> [Identical to previous version, which narrowly failed quorum but
> was otherwise unanimously supported.]
>
> Amend Rule 2160 (Deputisation) to read:
>
> Any player (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a
> particular office (deputise for that office) if all of the
> following are true:
>
> (a) The rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of
> holding that office, to perform the action (or, if the
> office is vacant, would so require if the office were
> filled). This requirement is fulfilled by the deputy
> performing the action.
>
> (b) A time limit by which the rules require the action to be
> performed has expired, or the office is vacant.
>
> (c) If the office is held by an active player, then the deputy
> announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e
> intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the
> particular action.
>
> (d) It would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
> other than by deputisation, if e held the office.
>
I agree to the following
{This is a pledge, and a public contract. If the previous version of
the above proposal was unanimously supported, anyone CAN and MAY, by
annoucement, act on my behalf to cause me to vote FOR the decision on
the above proposal. Sgeo CAN and MAY terminate this contract by
announcement.}
