On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:35 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> where the line was drawn. Does anyone know why rule 2127 was created in >> the first place? I'm wondering if the bar was intentionally set high to >> discourage that sort of scam. > > The archives show that Goethe originally proposed it requiring the > information be published within 30 days prior to the end of the voting > period, then retracted that when Michael suggested that 30 days was > too long, and proposed the current form (minus the endorsing stuff > which was added recently).
Oh yeah, I knew I had included a provision for at least some past information like recent reports (30 days was so that monthly reports were generally included). So what's preferable, a hard (but longer) limit like 30 days, or my just-now proto with squishy "reasonably available and clearly identified"? -G.
