On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >> AGAINST because I think it's broken: if you're going to do this, >> explicitly legislate conditional actions instead of the current mess >> of precedents (and get rid of the conditional voting rule) so we know >> exactly what sort of conditional action works. But I'd vote against >> even if it were fixed, because, well, it's useless. I can then go >> ahead and say "At 23:59:59.500 UTC, I spend <notes> to increase >> Murphy's caste", > > That's what "integral number of seconds after midnight" is intended > to prevent. Well, that and questions about the physical possibility > of something occurring 10^-100 seconds after something else.
Sounds reasonable. You should put that in the proposal. -root
