On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 9:20 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On 1/30/2020 9:06 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 17:03, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > >> Here's a somewhat different way we could do it: > >> > >> * An announcement resolving a decision doesn't need to specify > >> anything other than the decision --- not even the outcome. That causes > >> the decision to resolve to the (platonically) correct outcome, and it > >> is self-ratifying that that occurred. > >> > >> * The resolver SHALL include all that extra stuff in their resolution > >> message (and maybe SHALL respond to CoEs). > >> > >> Is there anything wrong with that? I feel with the current system, > >> even when we eventually figure out which proposals are adopted, > >> there's some disturbing temporary uncertainty about when exactly they > >> were adopted, which doesn't seem better than the temporary uncertainty > >> this version would introduce about what the outcome was. > > > > As I often do, I sent this just a little too soon and should have > > thought more. An obvious flaw with what I wrote is that we may never > > know for sure what exactly self-ratified, whereas the current system > > explicitly makes the outcome ratify. > > > > Anyway, I like G.'s proposal, but why even require a reasonably > > accurate tally for it to be self-ratifying? Just require > > decision+outcome, and make the rest SHALL. > > I went back and forth on that as a possibility - I don't have a strong reason > so maybe a SHALL is best - the only issue being what Alexis pointed out, that > if we want (as e suggested) to require the Assessor respond to inaccurate > tallies that don't change the result, we need to hard-code that, if the > individual ballots don't self-ratify. (A special category of "no this doesn't > self ratify but the Officer has to respond to the CoE anyway").
That's not how Rule 2201 is written. An officer always has to respond to a CoE, whether the document is self-ratifying or not, so long as e was required to publish the document. So creating an extra category is unnecessary. :) -Aris
