On Fri, 17 Jun 2011, omd wrote:
> While you're at it, two suggestions:
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > A proposal with a decision on which the option selected by Agora
> > is not ADOPTED does not take effect, rules to the contrary
> > notwithstanding.
>
> This is worded this way due to an old scam. It really should say
> "without a decision on which the option is ADOPTED".
Yeah, I stared at this for a while when cutting and pasting just now and
wondered why it was this way but just left it. How's this:
If a decision to adopt a proposal does not result in an outcome of
ADOPTED, it does not take effect, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
> > When a person creates a proposal, e SHOULD ensure that it
> > specifies one or more changes to the gamestate.
>
> I've always thought this text was really ugly.
I don't even know why we need it. No harm in a Null Proposal, is there? If you
think we need something that says what the general purpose of proposals is
(making changes to the gamestate) suggest some wording, otw I'm tempted to
delete entirely.
-G.
