Zefram wrote:
"Ordinary" proposals are not the most common type.
Maybe a reason for a different name, but "House" doesn't seem any better.
How about "Skewed", to contrast with "Democratic"?
As previously noted, the US House and Senate have voting strengths
directly in line with their propose
Ed Murphy wrote:
>There are currently no ways to make it irrational, and even if there
>were, it would only last until the end of the week.
Yes. Defining it to be restricted to rationals would have explanatory
benefit.
>I still think we should use sheqelim and agorot somewhere or other.)
Yes, I
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
c) A non-negative number of planned districts (NPD),
Could restrict that to "non-negative rational number".
There are currently no ways to make it irrational, and even if there
were, it would only last until the end of the week.
Amend Rule 2126 (Votin
Ed Murphy wrote:
>c) A non-negative number of planned districts (NPD),
Could restrict that to "non-negative rational number".
>Amend Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) by replacing "voting limits on
>ordinary proposals" with "the redistricting process", and by replacing
>each instance of "VVLOP"
4 matches
Mail list logo
