You're right, I didn't see that rule. (It didn't contain any of my search terms
- "Assessor", "ratification", "resolution".) Sorry.
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On July 19, 2018 4:18 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 12:15 -0400, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
>
> >
On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 12:15 -0400, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> Well, in this case I think it's irrelevant; the message in which the
> Assessor resolves decisions on proposals isn't defined as a _report_,
> so "CoEs" against it are informal anyway. But I agree it's something
> that needs clarifying.
Well, in this case I think it's irrelevant; the message in which the Assessor
resolves decisions on proposals isn't defined as a _report_, so "CoEs" against
it are informal anyway. But I agree it's something that needs clarifying.
Looking at rule 208, I believe the only question is whether you c
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
> > the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if a # of people didn't
> > receive them the CoE's weren't made.
>
> How big a #? This is reall
It's about a substantial number of people who would have engaged with
the message.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:30 AM Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
> > the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if a # of people didn't
receive them the CoE's weren't made.
How big a #? This is really horribly indeterminate.
Does it apply to non-player subscrib
I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if a # of people didn't
receive them the CoE's weren't made.
I'll check back but I'm likely out of time to fix stuff before I
need to resign (i.e. respond to CoEs).
7 matches
Mail list logo