>AGAINST. “In the 7 days of an Agoran month” is nonsense. With the obvious fix, >I’d likely vote for it: it’s a neat mechanic and ties in nicely with others.
I think this has been fixed and distributed in a fixed way in the new distribution. You also missed about five proposals or so, the ones added in the new distribution. Whatever happens, I'll definitely set a record for most proposals rejected. Looking like 1-4 or 0-5. On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote: > I change my vote on proposal 7932 to AGAINST. > > On 10/30/2017 08:54 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> I vote as follows: >> >>> ID Author(s) AI Title Pender Pend fee >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 7931* G. 3.0 Registration fix finally G. 1 sh. >> FOR. >> >>> 7932* ATMunn, [1] 1.0 A Reward for Obedience v5 ATMunn 1 AP >> AGAINST. “In the 7 days of an Agoran month” is nonsense. With the obvious >> fix, I’d likely vote for it: it’s a neat mechanic and ties in nicely with >> others. >> >>> 7933* Alexis 3.0 Ribbon Preservation Act Alexis 1 sh. >> FOR. >> >>> 7934* 天火狐 1.0 Poetry Duel Challenge Writ 天火狐 OP [2] >> AGAINST. Nice idea, but it’s a dead mechanic. >> >>> 7935* Trigon 3.0 Revision Limits v2 Trigon 1 AP >> AGAINST, hesitantly. It’s unclear whether this rule would take effect >> retroactively (which is worrying) or not (in which case it’s likely >> pointless). >> >>> 7936* V.J. Rada 2.0 Print Money V.J. Rada 1 AP >> AGAINST. Doesn’t do much to address stockpiling, and I’m ambivalent about >> destroying a bunch of Shinies in Agora’s possession every time a player >> deregisters, given the existing cash crunch on Agora’s side. In tandem with >> broader economic reforms, would vote for. >> >>> 7937* V.J. Rada, o 2.0 I Demand Faster Auctions V.J. Rada 1 AP >> AGAINST, for reasons G. has already visited. >> >>> 7938* Aris 3.0 Fix Campaign Proposals Aris 1 AP >> FOR. >> >>> 7939* V.J. Rada 1.0 Repeal the Reportor V.J. Rada 1 sh. >> AGAINST, but if the office falls silent again, bring this up at that time. >> >>> 7940* Alexis, [3] 3.0 High Power Cleanup Alexis 1 sh. >> FOR, but I think we likely need a broader effort to normalize what classes >> of document can be instruments. >> >>> 7941* Alexis 1.0 HTML Scrubbing Alexis 1 sh. >> AGAINST, make it a SHOULD or ENCOURAGED. >> >>> 7942* Alexis 1.0 No List Prefixes Alexis 1 sh. >> AGAINST, but I like the overall idea. Instead of addressing the how, perhaps >> these two proposals should set standards of conduct for the distributor and >> recommend how to accomplish them. I dislike the idea of demanding, by >> proposal, that the Distributor reconfigure _all_ interaction with the >> mailing lists, though. >> >>> 7943* ATMunn 2.0 Mini fixes ATMunn 1 sh. >> FOR. >> >>> 7944* Trigon 2.0 Who's the Secretary? Trigon 1 AP >> FOR. Whups. >> >>> 7945* Telnaior 1.0 Name and Shame Telnaior 1 AP >> FOR, but isn’t this the Rulekeepor’s domain? Anyways, fixing formatting by >> proposal seems fine to me. >> >>> 7946* Telnaior 3.0 MASUAC [4] Telnaior 1 AP >> AGAINST, use (and fix?) deregistration without objection. >> >>> 7947* V.J. Rada, [5] 3.0 MCVotA [6] V.J. Rada 2 sh. >> AGAINST, as above, and also for personal reasons on top of it. >> >> -o >> > > -- >From V.J. Rada
