On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: >> In my work on the rules history, I discovered that around 1999, it was >> possible to adopt proposals outside the normal distribution process, and >> this led to two proposals being adopted without classic ID numbers: one with >> ID number "01-003" and another without an ID number at all. Probably more >> were as well, but these are the only two in the modern ruleset's history. >> >> Do you think you could skip two ID numbers so that we could assign these >> regular ID numbers by proposal? If anyone has better ideas, especially for >> the one that never got an ID number and is only identified by name, I'm >> interested. I mostly want to clean this up for cleanliness but I guess it >> isn't the end of the world if we leaves things as is; it just makes it >> harder to keep track of them historically. > > 7957-7958 will work (I'll try not to forget). Isn't this the kind of > situation where ratification without objection is appropriate? > > -Aris
Given that there isn't consensus to fix this by RWO, I'm going to use these. -Aris
