OscarMeyr wrote:
My intent was to forestall issues that came up back in the days of
currencies and fees, where if someone didn't properly phrase their
payment of a fee, or they didn't accurately state the fee, their
action usually failed.
All those happened because of things like "paying" and
On Oct 5, 2006, at 6:16 PM, Michael Slone wrote:[Subject line fixed.]On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:16:05AM -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: No, which is why this sentence in the current proposal: The Promotor may accept reasonable synonyms for "expend" (such as"pay" or "use") as valid actions under this rule
[Subject line fixed.]
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:16:05AM -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> No, which is why this sentence in the current proposal:
> >The Promotor may accept reasonable synonyms for "expend" (such as
> >"pay" or "use") as valid actions under this rule.
> arguably weakens 754. Without th
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:21:50PM -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Erm, good point. In fact, if that sentence were removed entirely it
> would probably mandate more flexibility in langauge (because the
> Promotor would be required to accept common synonyms by precedent).
> The sentence gives em the
Eris wrote:
It says e "may" accept the alternate meanings. It needs to say
"shall".
Erm, good point. In fact, if that sentence were removed entirely it
would probably mandate more flexibility in langauge (because the
Promotor would be required to accept common synonyms by precedent).
The s
On 10/4/06, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nitpicky... how?
It says e "may" accept the alternate meanings. It needs to say "shall".
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"You can't prove anything."
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
On Oct 3, 2006, at 10:45 PM, Taral wrote:On 10/3/06, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 10/3/06, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > 4872 | Voting Credits | OscarMeyr | 3 | 09Sep06 | D>> AGAINST - voting power doesn't get reset, the Promotor is allowed to> be nitpicky.The propo
On 10/3/06, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/3/06, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 4872 | Voting Credits | OscarMeyr | 3 | 09Sep06 | D
>
> AGAINST - voting power doesn't get reset, the Promotor is allowed to
> be nitpicky.
The proposal would reset voting power afte
On 10/3/06, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 4872 | Voting Credits | OscarMeyr | 3 | 09Sep06 | D
AGAINST - voting power doesn't get reset, the Promotor is allowed to
be nitpicky.
The proposal would reset voting power after every win.
-root
9 matches
Mail list logo
