Josiah Worcester wrote: >Rule 2130 shall be amended, such that the last sentence states:
If such a proposal were adopted, I (as rulekeepor) would interpret this as replacing the existing last sentence. That doesn't seem likely to be your intent, in the context of the rule text, though. Would be better stated as "... amended by appending to the last paragraph:", or (if you did intend replacement) "... amended by replacing the last sentence with:". >Rule 1922 shall be amended, such that the following shall be a Patent Title: This is imprecise regarding the textual amendment to be made. Specifically, it doesn't say where in the list the new item goes. Would be better stated as "... amended by appending to the list of Patent Titles:". > The two rule amendments above shall be considered seperate proposals > for the >purpose of voting. We don't hold with legal fictions here. If they are to be considered separate proposals for the purposes of voting, then they are in fact separate proposals. I have recorded them as such. It is preferred that you make the extent of, and separation between, proposals more explicit. > It is suggested, but not enforced, that the title >of "Unscamster" shall be granted to the proposer of these two amendments by >the herald. The herald can't do that emself. Patent titles are awarded by rules or proposals. -zefram
