I slightly mind, but I probably would have done the same thing so meh. Also, come to think of it, I also abused that contract to your detriment, so maybe this is just karma.
Gaelan > On Feb 18, 2019, at 3:36 PM, D. Margaux <dmargaux...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Good point! Based on his recent hashes, he probably is. Therefore: > > If Aris’s message initiates any Agoran Decisions, then I vote, and I cause L, > ATMunn, and Gaelan to vote, for the first of {AGAINST, AFFIRM, Gaelan} which > is a valid option. > > Gaelan, I hope you don’t mind my changing your vote for you, but at least I > changed it to you... > >> On Feb 18, 2019, at 6:32 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote: >> >> Hold on, are we sure G. isn't in on it? >> >> -twg >> >> >> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >>> On Monday, February 18, 2019 11:31 PM, D. Margaux <dmargaux...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Like Gaelan, I do the following, and I cause ATMunn to do the following: >>> >>> - object to any intents announced in the quoted message. >>> - if quoted message initiates any Agoran Decisions, vote for the first of >>> {AGAINST, AFFIRM, G.} which is a valid option. >>> - if the quoted message contains an attempt to Ratify Without Objection >>> an incorrect document, point a thumb at Aris for the class-8 crime of >>> Endorsing Forgery. >>> >>> If the quoted message initiates any Agoran Decisions, I cause L to vote >>> for the first of {AGAINST, AFFIRM, G.} which is a valid option. >>> >>> >>>>> On Feb 17, 2019, at 10:31 PM, Aris Merchant >>>>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> I give notice that I intend to activate The Protocol, according to the >>>>> timetable specified for activations thereof. (If anyone remembers what >>>>> this >>>>> means, please contact me rather than trying to block it; we may be able to >>>>> work something out.) >>>>> -Aris >> >>