Ed Murphy wrote: ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That's the faulty one. It claims that the proposals were rejected, but then reports votes that would cause the proposals to be adopted.
>I accidentally omitted the * marks to indicate adoption, which I >think prompted the request for a non-blank mark to indicate rejection Yes. In the format you used in that message, when you forget to put in the marks (but do put in spaces where the marks are meant to go) it ends up being an explicit claim that the proposals were rejected. Using space as a mark with explicit meaning is troublesome. -zefram
