[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Sorry Neil] Wording modification of the The ???no GR, please??? amendement.

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 07:45:39AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Indeed, you are right: by definition, not all questions have been answered.
> The existing wording of the amendement is therefore logically inconsistent.
> I propose the following replacement as per article A.1.5 of our Contitution.

Received and updated.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: