On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Peter Lewis <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday 08 December 2010 12:04:22 Ronald van Haren wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Peter Lewis <[email protected]> > wrote: >> > While reading this, one more small thing came to mind: I wonder if we >> > should make it clear that though *the same* proposal requires a waiting >> > period, slightly different ones don't. An example of this might be the >> > approval of these very byelaws, where if they are voted down, a >> > subsequent proposal might be different by just a few words. We should >> > probably be clear about that. >> > >> > So I've added: "Proposals that are similar to the rejected proposal but >> > substantively different do not require a waiting period before being >> > presented." to the end of the waiting period paragraph. >> >> and who determines if there is a substantial difference between the >> two votes (I'm talking about edge cases here)? And what exactly is >> this substantial difference that is required, how do we quantify it? > > Indeed, there are always these questions :-) > > And maybe this isn't clear, but "substantive" is a little different from > "substantial". It basically means that there needs to be a difference of value > between the two proposals. I.e. the implication of accepting the second rather > than the first would be, at least in some small way, different. > > That's my feeling, anyway. > > Pete. >
I'm not a native speaker, but I always thought they could be used interchangeably. Actually most of the on-line dictionaries don't give a clear answer about the difference. Either way, we should probably try to use a different wording if the purpose is to make the document more understandable. Ronald
