On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Why should II matter at all? > > It's an objective acknowledgment of the significance of the proposed > changes. IIRC, a proposal to return to a straight Disinterested / > Interested system (basically reducing scope from 0-to-3 to 0-to-1) > was recently voted down, so people generally still want this (even > if no currency earnings currently treat 1-to-3 differently).
Let me rephrase that. Why should II matter at all to anyone's vote, provided we're not talking about a trivial proposal that's not disinterested?
