RE: [s-d] Re: [auto] Triller amends p338

["Mark Walsh" <flutesultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On: 1/12/06 5:05:03 PM Peter sent:
> Subject: [s-d] Re: [auto] Triller amends p338
>
> Triller has amended p338.:
> > Motion 338/1: Annulled Motions Permit Legislating Interests To Undo
> > Decided Extraneousness.
> >
> > [[AMPLITUDE ]]
>
> I like that acronym.
>
> > [[ This in anticipation of a Proposal removing Proposal ]]
>
> Not sure what you mean by anticipation to me... It looks to me like
> this prop already allows one to change Pending Props to be Annulled.
>
This does nothing to recreate a used pen. That's what I think
Antonio wanted to do when e 'Recalled' eir motion.
Someone will have to propose that changing a proosal type to
annulled destroys that pen and creates a new pen.
This just creates a mechanism for voiding a submitted motion.
>
> > [[ Changing the type to Annulled eliminates problems
> > with reserializing Motions if one is removed. ]]
>
> No reserializing is needed. Rule 2-6 gives each motion a number at the
> time that it's created, and it's okay to leave gaps. (And leaving gaps
> is in there to prevent reserializing when we realize that it was
> impossible for a particular prop to have been submitted.)
>
I guess I knew that. I never thought about leaving gaps.
The threads would log a record of that happening.
I like that acronym, too!
Triller



_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss