On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 22:02 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> [Oops we forgot to get Royal Assent last time.]
>
> I issue a Cabinet Order of Manifesto, distributing the proposal in the
> Proposal Pool with title "Celebration!" that I most recently submitted,
> removing it from the Proposal Pool and initiating a referendum on it.
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 3,
> the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR and
> AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes).
>
> For this proposal, the class is Democratic. Other attributes of the
> proposal are as follows:
>
> Title: Celebration!
> Author: Janet
> Coauthors:
> Adoption index: 3.0
>
> {
[snip]
> }
CoE: This decision has not been initiated, because this notice is not
valid; specifically, it is missing an essential parameter (the adoption
index of the decision, defined as essential in rule 1950 for decisions
with adoption indices; this is such a decision per rule 1607).
It does specify the adoption index of the *proposal*, but the wording
is quite clear that the adoption index specified is an attribute of the
proposal, not of the decision about whether to adopt it. According to
rule 1950, both proposals and decisions have adoption indices, and they
are not necessarily required to be equal (e.g. the Sabotage Stone can
cause them to differ). So the error in the original distribution is
that per rules 107 and 1950, the notice must clearly specify the
adoption index of the *decision* – but it actually specifies the
adoption index of the *proposal* instead.
--
ais523
