Re: proposals

From: Factitious (x40_at_pacbell.net)
Date: Wed Oct 03 2001 - 15:28:08 PDT

Next message: Gallivanting Tripper: "Re: 169:B"
Previous message: Arnt Gulbrandsen: "Re: How do I get off the mailing list?"
In reply to: Jesse Welton: "Re: proposals"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Jesse Welton wrote:

> I fail to see the appeal here.  But in any case, the proposal is pure
> nonsense, since it refers to a rule which does not exist, "*the* rule
> which the Judge *has* re-labeled..."  Now, could this possibly be a
> proposal to change the decision of the Judge, under RO 8?  No, because
> there is no such decision.  Neither does the proposal propose an
> amendment or temporary overrule of the ROs, as described under RO 9.
> I can therefore only conclude that this is not a proposal of any type
> described by the ROs, and therefore is without effect whatever the
> outcome of the vote.

I agree, and I vote for 169:B.  I vote against 169:A.

--
Rule Date: 2001-10-03 22:28:15 GMT

Next message: Gallivanting Tripper: "Re: 169:B"
Previous message: Arnt Gulbrandsen: "Re: How do I get off the mailing list?"
In reply to: Jesse Welton: "Re: proposals"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST