Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

2012-01-10 Thread Aaron Goldfein
I state my support for southpointingchariot to support ais523 to hold this
position. I don't, however, support ais523.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 22:34, southpointingchariot <
southpointingchariot.no...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I state my support for ais523 to hold this position.
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>
>> I initiate an election for Ambassador, nominating ais523, omd, and
>> Pavitra.  (All are non-idle players of BlogNomic; I believe the only
>> others are scshunt [who recently resigned] and me [I don't want it].)
>>
>> I initiate an election for Promotor.  Per Rule 2154, omd is considered
>> to have been nominated and accepted.
>>
>
>


DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

2012-01-10 Thread southpointingchariot
I state my support for ais523 to hold this position.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Ed Murphy  wrote:

> I initiate an election for Ambassador, nominating ais523, omd, and
> Pavitra.  (All are non-idle players of BlogNomic; I believe the only
> others are scshunt [who recently resigned] and me [I don't want it].)
>
> I initiate an election for Promotor.  Per Rule 2154, omd is considered
> to have been nominated and accepted.
>


DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7144-7153

2012-01-10 Thread omd
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Ed Murphy  wrote:
>> 7145 2   omd                  A controversial proposal
>
> AGAINST (I think you meant "unambiguous" there at the end?)

The intent expressed in such a message is necessarily ambiguous, but
required to be unambiguous.


Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A meta-CFJ

2012-01-10 Thread Arkady English
On 9 January 2012 23:59, Ben Schultz  wrote:
>
> Gratuitous counter argument, possibly erroneous:
>
> I seem to recall that Agoran precedent allows non-players to submit CFJs 
> without affecting their player (or non-player) status.
>
> OscarMeyr
>

I think this is not so much "Agoran precedent" as enshrined in the rules.

Rule 591, second sentence: "An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any
first-class person, by announcement which includes the statement to be
inquired into."

Seems pretty clear cut to me - non-player first-class people (do we
prefer persons?) can initiate an inquiry. Criminal cases can be
initiated by any person according 1504, while the rules on membership
say we must unambiguously announce an intention to join the game.

Since a non-player first-class person CAN initiate a case without
being a player, there is no reason to interpret a CFJ as a request for
playership - therefore there is also no reason to affect their
playership.

Arkady