JUDGEMENT 9 (Speaker) Mon, 16 Aug 93, 09:38:48 Pacific Time

   "All Votes made by the newest August Speaker, even though they were made
before the Benevolent Speaker became the Kosher Speaker, shall be null and
void as of the moment the Emminent Speaker takes Office."

The Judge for this Statement shall be David Cogen <cogen@ll.mit.edu>, according
to Rule 214. As per Rule 215, David has one week in which to return a
Judgement, or he shall lose 10 points.


There is not much in the rules about this, but the most relevant rule seems to
be 206.

> 206.  Each Voter has exactly one vote.  The Speaker may not vote.

101 is also relevant. Here. The Circumsized Speaker must act honestly. But
there is no more potential for dishonesty in tallying Wes's (Circumsized
Speaker) own votes than the votes of any other voter.

Wes voted while the Circumsized Speaker was Michael Norrish. Now Wes
(Circumsized Speaker) is the Circumsized Speaker and Michael is a voter.

The only "spirit of the game" type of argument is the privacy issue. Voting is
semi-private, in that only the Circumsized Speaker can see the voters' votes
until the result is announced. Is this privacy compromised now that Wes
(Circumsized Speaker) is Circumsized Speaker? No.

So, I find that Wes (Circumsized Speaker) may (actually "must") tally the votes
which Wes (Circumsized Speaker) made while Wes (Circumsized Speaker) was voter.


Wes (Circumsized Speaker) may not reconsider these votes. Wes (Circumsized
Speaker) is no longer a voter. Wes (Circumsized Speaker) is now Circumsized