Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6476 - 6494

2009-09-22 Thread Ed Murphy
comex wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: >> Admitted. 6476 is hereby adopted: > > You already announced this. But with the wrong vote tally (the voting period was not extended, thus Wooble's vote was invalid).

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6476 - 6494

2009-09-22 Thread comex
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Admitted.  6476 is hereby adopted: You already announced this. -- -c.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6476 - 6494

2009-09-19 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > For each entity other than myself, I intend with notice to audit that > entity. I'll likely re-post this intent every 14 days. That can't possibly work; I demand that you publish a list of every entity in the universe to prove this wouldn't ta

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6476 - 6494

2009-09-18 Thread comex
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Proposal 6476 (Ordinary, AI=1.0, Interest=1) by Yally > No More Paradox > > Amend point d of Rule 2143 to read: > >      For every non-IADoP report, the date on which it was last >      submitted. Amendment fails because there is no point d; I s