On 2015-05-18 12:40, Alex Smith wrote: > On Sun, 2015-05-17 at 16:52 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> On Sun, 17 May 2015, Luis Ressel wrote: >>> You, on the other hand, only wrote "Proposal: [...]". I've accepted >>> such submissions in the past, but I'm not sure if I actually have to >>> (or even can). Furthermore, in your case, the "Proto:" in the subject >>> line did add further ambiguousity. >> >> Someone a while ago, on a CFJ, found that saying "Proposal: ..." is >> clear enough to cause to submit. However, it has tripped people up >> several times since then, so maybe evidence since then is that it >> *isn't* clear. The "Proto" certainly aids the case. -G. > > For what it's worth, I interpreted it as unambiguously a proposal > submission (if possibly an unintentional one).
I, on the other hand, would consider it ambiguous. The "Proto:" caused me to not even consider that it was an actual proposal submission (until the point was raised). -- Sprocklem
