On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 10:00 -0500, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk> wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 09:51 -0500, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Aaron Goldfein <aarongoldf...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > A player CAN, with 2 support, change an ordinary decision to be > >> > democratic > >> > provided the voting of the people has not already commenced > >> > >> The voting of the people commences when the decision is created. > > > > That hasn't stopped Goethe /trying/ to democratise a decision before it > > was created; IMO, that fails, but IIRC, it never makes a difference. > > > > The whole democratisation-of-5707 brouhaha was pretty interesting and > > instructive, though. Referring to a decision by the number of the > > proposal it's about is usual; referring to a decision by the number of > > the proposal it's about fails utterly if the number hasn't been > > allocated yet, though. > > You recently intended to create an object that's not defined by the > rules in the expectation that it will be defined when you resolve the > action. In the 5707 case, the intent to democratize was made before > the number was assigned, but it was resolved after it was assigned.
Ah, good point. Probably the first intent will fail then, though. (It would definitely fail if someone forms a contract that defines "Medal" in the meantime.) The second intent should still succeed, though. -- ais523
