On Mon, 2017-05-22 at 12:57 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 
> Oops, forgot something...  I withdraw my most recent CFJ.
> 
> 
> I CFJ on:  In a message dated Mon, 22 May 2017 15:31:30 -0400,
>              Publius Scribonius Scholasticus initiated an Agoran
> Decision.

I think I missed this earlier?
Assuming I haven't already numbered it, this is CFJ 3513 and I assign
it to nichdel.

> I Bar Publius Scribonius Scholasticus.  [this is the only difference]
> 
> 
> Caller's Arguments:
> 
> Given my recent attempt to "announce" OscarMeyr, I wonder if "announced non-
> players" is ambiguous?  In past, listing "all members of set S" without
> specifying the individual set members has been seen as ambiguous, IF it 
> is beyond a reasonable effort of an average player to dig back and find that
> list (as opposed to the officer doing it, as it's eir job) or IF there's
> some uncertainty on membership (e.g. OscarMeyr).
> 
> For players, there's a handy Registrar's report to refer to, so it's not
> beyond a reasonable effort for average players to find that.  For non-
> players, not so much (and if the rules are silent here, consider there
> is an "unfair" burden on non-players who are not clearly listed for
> informed voting - especially listing it as "Ørjan and others"!).
> 
> It is also unclear if the election is limited to "announced" non-players,
> given R2482:  "non-player persons can also become valid options during the
> voting period by announcement."  If this clause is non-functional due to
> conflicts with R107, it would be good to identify the problem and correct
> R2482.  If the clause is *not* non-functional, then the announcement
> limiting options to "announced" players is simply incorrect and therefore
> invalid.
> 
> Caller's Evidence:
> (Message in question)
> On Mon, 22 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > True, the CoE having been successful, I hereby initiate a Victory Election
> > with all players, announced non-players, and PRESENT as valid options and
> > the Herald as the vote collector. I would be in favor of all watchers
> > (Ørjan and others) and G. putting emselves into the race. The ballots
> > should be cast in an instant runoff format.

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

Reply via email to