On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Zefram wrote:
> Ian Kelly wrote:
>> You know, I'm no longer convinced that that bug really needs a
>> solution. Dependent actions are meant to be quick and simple, not
>> precise, and a change that makes them simpler is a good thing.
>
> For a "with support" ("with 1 support"), it makes the difference between
> requiring two first-class persons in favour and one person being able
> to do it on eir own. That's too big a difference to gloss over.
No, I changed N+1 to N and then disqualified the initiator from being
a voter. Net effect: Still takes two first-class people to do it, same
as before. root's comment about giving second-class persons performing
it an extra vote is valid though, I understand that concern now.
-Goethe
