DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-07-08 Thread omd via agora-discussion
at 11:43 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:00 PM omd via agora-business wrote: CoE: The distribution message is inconsistent about who authored this proposal. If it was validly distributed, AGAINST. Denied. The message said: "Where the information show

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-07-02 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 7/1/20 11:59 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: >> 8462* Jason, Falsifian 3.0 Fee-based methods > AGAINST, because the last paragraph is scammable as a power escalation You appear to be right, but that's also a problem with current rule: > If the Rules define a fee-based actio

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-06-30 Thread nch via agora-discussion
On 6/30/20 8:03 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/30/20 9:02 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/30/20 7:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion >> wrote: >>> On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: On 6/30/20 5:47 A

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-06-30 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
On 6/30/20 9:02 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/30/20 7:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion > wrote: >> On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business >>> wrote: AGAINST (I'd be

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-06-30 Thread nch via agora-discussion
On 6/30/20 7:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business >> wrote: >>> AGAINST (I'd be supportive of this if it didn't get rid of Certifiable >>> P

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-06-30 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business > wrote: >> AGAINST (I'd be supportive of this if it didn't get rid of Certifiable >> Patches) > > Is the 2+X support mechanism not a sufficient replacement? Why not? > N

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

2020-06-30 Thread nch via agora-discussion
On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > AGAINST (I'd be supportive of this if it didn't get rid of Certifiable > Patches) Is the 2+X support mechanism not a sufficient replacement? Why not? -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager