On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:47:59 -0500
Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Elliott Hird
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2008/11/17 Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> CoE:
> >>
> >> This is missing most of the votes that were cast on this proposal.
> >>
> >> I intend, with 2 support, to initiate a criminal case alleging that
> >> the AFO violated Rule 2215 by publishing the below message in an
> >> attempt to mislead other into thinking P5961 passed.
> >>
> >> I intend, with 2 support, to initiate a criminal case alleging that
> >> comex violated Rule 1742 by causing the AFO to not obey the rules of
> >> Agora to the maximum possible extent by causing it to publish the
> >> below quoted message.
> >
> > The other ballots were declared invalid.
> >
> Possibly, the declaration of invalidity did not work.. I remember some
> rule against tampering with these things, though that might be from
> Canada..
Is this what you were thinking of?
Rule 2034/4 (Power=3)
Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges
Any proposal that would otherwise change the validity of any
existing vote on any specific unresolved Agoran decision is
wholly without effect, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
This does not prevent amendment of the rules governing the
validity of votes on Agoran decisions in general.
Once an Agoran decision has been resolved, votes on it CANNOT be
validly submitted or retracted, and its outcome CANNOT be
changed in any way, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. This
does not prevent correcting errors in reporting its resolution.
A public document purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is
self-ratifying.
--
Elysion
