On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:05 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Because anyone could have made the scam contest cease to be a contest > without 3 objections (and I don't think there would have been 3 > bojections,
Sure there would have been. That was our reason for bringing a third founding member into the contract. > although surely that clause should be with 3 support, to > be equivalent to the contest creation clause) That's what I've been saying all along (2 support would be sufficient, though). -root
