I made a new intent, yes. The old one, I'm told, was totally
ineffective for lacking "without objection".
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:40 PM, ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ah, ok. I figured I wasn't.
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> G. raised the question of what happened to the ongoing elections, given
>> that my proposal changed the election rules without a proviso to continue
>> the ongoing ones. Then VJ pointed out that e had failed to initiate the
>> decision correctly (e had left out the valid options, per rule 107 this
>> invalidates the decision), so there was no election to actually vote on.
>> Then consensus was to simply ratify the results as having had a winning
>> election, rather than try to sort through the mess of figuring out the
>> status of the elections under the new ruleset.
>>
>> tl;dr you're not yet the ADoP.
>>
>> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 at 13:20 ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh, wait, the argument was about the resolution of proposals 7908-7921.
>>> Still, the main focus of this was around this election.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:18 PM, ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So I know that earlier, VJ Rada intended ratified the document saying
>>>> {Just now, ATMunn won an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an
>>>> election
>>>> for Prime Minister}, however e then pointed the finger at emself for not
>>>> stating that the document was wrong. This was then followed by a bunch of
>>>> arguments.
>>>>
>>>> So what actually happened here? Am I the ADoP now, or not yet?
>>>
>>>
>
--
>From V.J. Rada
