A search through my archives shows that I've been using it since it became my responsibility to list quorum in my distributions. That happened with the adoption of Proposal 7853, "Close Ancient Loopholes", by ais523, on Monday June 5th 2017, which also set quorum to always be an integer value. So it looks like an arbitrary insertion by me. :) It's part of the format now, so I'd prefer not to change it, but I will if there's public demand to do so. Sorry everyone for the mixup. I'm astonished it lasted this long without anyone catching it.
-Aris On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Alex Smith wrote: >> On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 16:15 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> > All of the below proposals met the quorum of 3.0. >> >> How did the ".0" get into quorum? I've seen it be used here for quite a >> while, but we didn't use it historically and there's no rules reason >> for it. It's not an index, after all (and under current rules it's >> always an integer). > > Personally I was copying from the Promotor's distribution without really > thinking about it... Aris any particular reason for the precision? > > > > >