ehird wrote, privately:
> I agree to the following:
>
> {
> This is a private contract.
> This is a pledge.
> When a party to this contract wishes to say "support", they must
> instead say "obejct".
> }
This sort of thing was already shot down by CFJs 1260-61 (basically a
refusal to attempt distinguishing intentional from accidental typos,
no matter how clear-cut it seems).
Assuming you don't actually object to the change at a conceptual level,
I suggest retracting your objection (if any) so that it can go forward.
