On Tue, 17 May 2011, omd wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:38 PM, omd <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:17 PM, omd <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This amendment modifies two clauses; the unexpected one is this (sigh): > >> > >> An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a > >> ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice > >> indicating which two of the available options e selects. > > > > Now that I think about it, the most sensible way to interpret this is > > as a requirement for each ballot to specify both FOR and AGAINST-- > > i.e., there's now no way to vote for a proposal without also voting > > against it! > > This would have also affected all the proposals coming after in that batch.
In a weird way, because the ballots were already valid under the old rule.
