==============================  CFJ 1675  ==============================

    Quorum for a proposal is based on the maximum number of eligible
    voters at any time during the voting period.


Caller:                                 Murphy

Judge:                                  The Hanging Judge
Judgement:                              FALSE



Called by Murphy:                       20 May 2007 22:50:12 GMT
Assigned to The Hanging Judge:          22 May 2007 01:00:42 GMT
Judged FALSE by The Hanging Judge:      23 May 2007 20:11:11 GMT


Judge The Hanging Judge's Arguments:

(pseudo-judged by Zefram due to a bug in the judge eligibility rule)

Quorum is defined by R879.  Its core definition is "one third the number
of eligible voters".  The other clauses modify this a bit, but not in the
ways that matter.  So quorum is based on the number of eligible voters;
not the number of eligible voters at any particular time.  CFJ 1652
has already found that the set of eligible voters can change during the
voting period.  Although not explicitly addressed by CFJ 1652, the same
argument extends to allowing the set of eligible voters to continue to
change after the voting period.  Putting these together, I find that
quorum for a proposal can also change, correspondingly, during and after
the voting period.  Therefore all three of these statements, which attempt
to set a single quorum value for each proposal, must be judged FALSE.

I shall proceed to answer the underlying question of what is the quorum
value that actually matters for a proposal.  Quorum is used in R955 part
(b), which comes into play when the vote collector is determining the
outcome of the Agoran decision.  This is not at a particular defined time,
such as the end of the voting period.  It is necessarily no earlier than
the end of the voting period, and similarly no later than when the Agoran
decision is resolved by publishing voting results are published.

R955 curiously does not simply describe a mathematical recipe for
determining the result of an Agoran decision.  Instead it is explicitly
formulated as a set of obligations on the vote collector, constituting a
set of calculation steps that the vote collector is required to execute,
personally and in sequence.  It therefore seems most likely that the time
at which quorum becomes relevant is the time when the vote collector
actually makes this calculation.  The vote collector has some latitude
in choosing the time, and it appears that eir choice of time to perform
this calculation influences the matter of quoracy.