On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, comex wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Sean Hunt <ride...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Ed Murphy wrote: >>> CFJ: Proposal 6122 has taken effect. >>> >>> Caller's arguments: Per Rule 2034(c) as amended by Proposal 6139, the >>> resolution of Proposals 6121 through 6139 constituted a self-ratifying >>> claim that Proposal 6122 has not been prevented from taking effect. > > Gratuitous: So this was an intentional loophole too? I'm getting > tired of them, much more fun to exploit the unintentional sort.
FWIW, I understand it was an accidental bug that happened to be noticed by its author after submission, so call it unintentional with intential not- pointing-it-out. I disagree by the way, of your recent scams/scam attempts, I thought the cleverer ones were the ones with longer-term subtle groundwork that no one picked up on (e.g. increasing the power of dependent actions). -G.
