Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-02-07 Thread Luke Tyler via agora-discussion
Discussion Cc: Jason Cobb Subject: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321 On 2/7/20 1:35 AM, Luke Tyler via agora-business wrote: >> 8308& Falsifian3.0 Imposing order on the order > PRESENT > >> 8309* Alexis

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-02-07 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 2/7/20 1:35 AM, Luke Tyler via agora-business wrote: >> 8308& Falsifian3.0 Imposing order on the order > PRESENT > >> 8309* Alexis 3.0 A Degree of Inefficiency > AGAINST > I'm sorry, I believe you missed the cutoff by a few hours. -- Jason Cobb

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-02-01 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 2/1/20 5:33 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: >> 8310& Jason, Alexis3.0 Deputisation timeliness > PRESENT. Seems inoffensive, but I haven't been paying attention to the > discussion about why it's necessary. Also it's one of those proposals > that requires me to

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-02-01 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 2/1/20 5:24 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: > 8310& Jason, Alexis3.0 Deputisation timeliness > AGAIST --- Wouldn't let me deputise for a vacant office to perform an > action unrelated to the office? Err... yes, yes it would. That's not good. (No, this wasn't a scam.)

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-02-01 Thread James Cook via agora-discussion
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 03:15, omd via agora-business wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 6:29 PM Aris Merchant via agora-official > wrote: > > 8308& Falsifian3.0 Imposing order on the order > AGAINST; I think this is too vague to be a valid rule change Are you referring to this

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8308-8321

2020-01-31 Thread Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 22:15, omd via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > 8316* Alexis 3.0 Zombie voting package > PRESENT; the fact that the new Rule 683 clause forces default votes to > be "valid" means that they could be submitted even by ineligible