omd wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >>> *7111 1.0 Tanner L. Points for the Big Guy >>> *7115 1.0 Tanner L. Relax / Stroke Hell >> >> CoE: not that either of these would have any effect due to >> insufficient AI, but these proposals with these purported AIs never >> existed and thus weren't distributed. > > Actually, I'm pretty sure these proposals were still validly > distributed, even with the incorrectly listed AI, because nobody CoEd > the distribution within 7 days. They proceeded to fail.
Purported distributions don't self-ratify. Purported resolutions do (R2034), including (for decisions on proposals) the implicit claim that the proposal exists.
