Re: [s-b] [s-d] Fix Infinite Votes Tweak

[Sgeo <sgeoster@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:51 PM, comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Elliott Hird
> <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 25 Dec 2008, at 22:18, Alex Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Well, who am I kidding? I become Paranoid.
>>
>> All other parts of the rules refer to vote, singular.
>>
>> And nowhere is multiple votes explicitly referenced.
>>
>> I'd say it's OK as long as nobody retracts/revotes...
>
> A proposal's Strength is equal to the number of Registered Voters
> whose Final Vote on that proposal is FOR minus the number of
> Registered Voters whose Final Vote on that proposal is AGAINST.
>
> There is no possible way this can be construed as allowing multiple
> votes.  It counts Voters, not Votes, for one thing; besides, although
> "Final Vote" is no longer defined, its ordinary language meaning is
> obviously "most recent vote".  Worst case scenario: which group a
> Voter who votes in some weird way is in is undefined, so we have to
> have enough people unambiguously voting for a fix to outnumber them.

I become Calm.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business