Ivan Hope wrote: > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 6:35 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> ========================== Equity Case 2108 ========================== >>>> >>>> Ivan Hope has failed to increase eir VP holdings above 50 within >>>> the allotted 60 day timeframe. >>> I judge: >>> >>> Ivan Hope CXXVII SHALL, for each distribution of proposals vote SELL >>> (2VP) on at least half of those proposals. Parties to this equation >>> SHOULD assign a sentence of EXILE should they be the judge of a CFJ >>> with an applicable question on sentencing accusing Ivan Hope CXXVII of >>> failing to uphold eir obligations under this equation. This equation >>> terminates when Ivan Hope CXXVII possesses 50 Vote Points. >>> >> Exactly 50? > > Given that "50 Vote Points" does not mean "50 Vote Points and no other > assets", it seems it shouldn't mean "50 Vote Points and no other Vote > Points", either.
Also you can remove all ambiguity by transferring any excess Vote Points to a confederate (preferably one contractually obligated to transfer them back ASAP).
