Re: [s-b] [s-d] Proposal: Hurried Proposals

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Billy Pilgrim wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Jamie Dallaire
>> <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I see your point, and thing both without-objection or majority-vote would
>>> work. My only gripe is with the time period. 1 *-day might very well be
>> too
>>> little time for those adversely affected by a proposal to actually happen
>> to
>>> read it and form an opinion.
>> "1 nday" can be 1 second if you submit the tweak right before midnight.
> 
> 
> I think 1 rday can. 1 nday has to be at least 1 day + an infinitesimal
> amount of time.

Oh dear, I think I've been making an off-by-one error with rdays all
this time.

Proposal:  Minimum US RDAY

Amend Rule 2-1 (NTime) by replacing this text:  {

A duration to the effect of "X rdays", where X is a number, shall be
interpreted to mean the duration ends after X occurrences of midnight
UTC.

} with this text:  {

A duration to the effect of "X rdays", where X is a number, shall be
interpreted to mean the duration ends at the end of the rday after X
occurrences of midnight UTC.

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