On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> Proposal: More ID numbers (AI=2, Distributable via fee) > > Does this mean you just paid the fee? That looks like CFJ-worthy > ambiguity there...
Yeah, by the letter of it I'm not sure it's possible to make a proposal Distributable before submitting it (and writing out its text in full), so I initially included my fee-paying at the end of the proposal. But after other players adopted this shorthand and nobody objected, I adopted it as well. >> Amend Rule 1607 by replacing "Distributed proposals have ID numbers" >> with "Proposals have ID numbers". > > Do you think this over-inflates proposal ID numbers with ones that are > submitted than retracted? If I submit one to the pool, then 10 minutes > later notice a flaw and retract and re-submit, does the promotor still > (after the fact) have to assign number to the old one? This is a fairly > common occurrence. > > Maybe a middle ground is "proposals that are distributed or a player > announces intent to adopt" get ID numbers. I don't think it's common enough to make a significant difference, and it's rather unusual IMO that proposals in the Proposal Pool have to be referred to by title when just about every other tracked body of text has an ID number. > -G. > > >
