Ed Murphy wrote:
> or if less than two members of its
> basis have taken an active role in determining its actions
> during the past four weeks,
Needs to be more precise. "Taking an active role in determining its
actions" could be interpreted as referring to
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
or if less than two members of its
basis have taken an active role in determining its actions
during the past four weeks,
Needs to be more precise. "Taking an active role in determining its
actions" could be interpreted as
Ed Murphy wrote:
>This is intended to be interpreted on a per-case basis. For instance,
>for Human Point Two's "with consent or without objection" style of
>approval, I would expect consent to be interpreted as active, and
>lack of objection as passive.
Ah, that's worse. That's actually how I or
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
This is intended to be interpreted on a per-case basis. For instance,
for Human Point Two's "with consent or without objection" style of
approval, I would expect consent to be interpreted as active, and
lack of objection as passive.
Ah, that's worse. That's ac
On 9/15/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/15/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The voting periods of the Agoran decisions on whether to adopt
> > Proposals 5222 through 5224 would have ended about 12 hours ago,
> > with a result of FAILED QUORUM. Rule 2168 thus doubles the
> >
5 matches
Mail list logo
