|Kieron Jarvis on 19 Oct 2000 03:52:06 -0000|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|RE: spoon-discuss: incompatibility in judgements|
Thank you for clearing that up. I was wondering how you could say that (Zaganra's) proposal stopped revisions. I've looked at your proposal and like it. XnJester > I see the source of the confusion. You commented on a proposal by > zagarna, which I vigorously defended, thiking you were referring to my > proposal which would do almost exaclty the same thing, except would not > allow gratuitous alterations within the voting period. My proposal was > submitted a little while ago but has not been recognized yet. > > Poulenc > > On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Kieron Jarvis wrote: > > > > For this to happen it would have to be possible for revisions to be > > > submitted after voting. Under my proposal this is not possible. The only > > > regard in which this proposal system is any more flexible is that it > > > forces the recognition of all revisions made up to the start of voting. > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > My proposal would not allow the withdrawing or revising of proposals after > > > voting starts unless they were submitted before the start of voting, in > > > which case we would all be aware of them. Without this amendment we > > > cannot be sure of what we are voting on until the ballot is published, and > > > maybe not even then. > > > > I can't see where revisions are not possible after voting commences. I would > > like to see revisions limited to the period before voting commences, but I > > don't see it here. Maybe I'm missing something. > > > > XnJester.