ais523 wrote: > On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:44 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: >> The PerlNomic Partnership wrote: >> >>> 5725 D 1 2.0 Murphy Namespace conflicts (players) >> This was INVALID by R107(e) (and I have been discarding votes on it >> accordingly). In case the PNP has technical difficulty redistributing >> with correct data, I intend to deputise for em to do so. > The PNP could redistribute correctly, but if it did so would assign a > different number. Would that work?
Only distributed proposals can be assigned ID numbers, so yes. I would then delete 5725 in the Assessor DB.
