On Mon, 2025-11-03 at 15:29 +0100, Cosmo via agora-business wrote: > > On 03/11/2025 08:16, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > > On 11/3/25 01:43, Cosmo via agora-official wrote: > > > I initiate a referendum on each of the following proposals, removing > > > them from the proposal pool. For each referendum the vote collector is the > > > Assessor, the quorum is 3, the adoption index is that of the associated > > > proposal, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR > > > and AGAINST. (PRESENT and conditional votes are also both valid options.) > > > > > > ID Author AI Name > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 9254* Janet+ 3.0 Administrative Publication Act > > > 9255* Janet 3.0 It's personal > > > 9256~ Murphy 1.0 No more apathetic apathy > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > On each of the above-quoted purported initiations of a referendum, I > > CoE: no such referendum was initiated, as the proposal was previously > > removed from the Proposal Pool (by distribution a few minutes earlier). > I deny each claim. > The creation of each referendum did fail, but I don't think there's > really a good way to publish a revision and the claim is clearly true, > so an inquiry case makes no sense either.
Unfortunately, this would cause the second initiation attempt to self- ratify. As such, I issue a doubt on the document published at 11/3/25 01:43 and inner-quoted above: it did not correctly initiate referenda because the specified proposals were not in the Proposal Pool. I recommend you do not "officially" respond to this doubt: responding to a CoE is a SHALL if you were required to publish the document, but a SHOULD if you were not required to publish it, and you are not required to distribute proposals that are not in the proposal pool and thus do not have a SHALL requirement here (and the "distribute proposals once per week" requirement had been satisified already that week, so you weren't required to publish for that reason either). Alternatively, you could create a corrected version that distributes no proposals. -- ais523
