On Wed, 2025-02-05 at 17:44 +0000, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora- business wrote: > On Wed, 2025-02-05 at 02:16 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official > wrote: > > 9211~ qenya, Mischief 1.7 De-Convoluting Mooting v1.1 > > 9212* Mischief 3.0 Incentives > > 9213~ Murphy 1.0 Twice the pride > > FOR, FOR, FOR.
I'm intrigued as to whether this is a set of three valid votes or not – R683p3 might not be complied with, but I'm not sure. Do we already have a precedent about it, or is it worth calling a CFJ? (Note: this isn't an "I think this doesn't work" situation, more of an "I'm not sure either way" situation. I think it definitely wouldn't work if voting were an action by announcement, but it isn't.) -- ais523
