On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:55 AM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree with Wooble that SELL (5VP - AGAINST) probably works, due to it > being an abbreviation whose expansion is well-known and repeatedly > published. (Note, however, that it is not certain that the Assessor > understood it correctly; Murphy recently admitted to treating unfilled > tickets as no-vote rather than PRESENT.) However, "SELL (5VP - AGAINST) > x 3" (I can't remember the exact spacing, but I think it was something > like that) isn't explicitly contract-defined, and from discussions in > a-d it is relatively clear that there is more than one plausible > interpretation of it, thus it is an ambiguous abbreviation.
You know, it seems to me that your interpretation of it should more plausibly be written "SELL (5VP - AGAINST x 3)". -root
