Re: spoon-discuss: Changing votes

[Wonko <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoth Glotmorf,

> On 4/25/02 at 10:27 PM Wonko wrote:
> 
>> Quoth Glotmorf,
>> 
>>> On 4/25/02 at 10:13 PM Wonko wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Quoth Glotmorf,
>>>> 
>>>>> Mithter A...Both Rob and Wonko thay Prop 5-8-8 uthed to have the wordth
>>>> "I
>>>>> propothe a rule" in it, yet Prop 5-8-8 didn't thow that it wath making
>> a
>>>> rule
>>>>> that contained a rule.  Therefore my vote wath bathed on a prop with a
>>>> typo in
>>>>> it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Pleathe correct Prop 5-8-8.  My vote on the correct verthion of it ith
>>>> "yeth".
>>>>> 
>>>>> Glotmorf
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Sorry, but you can't do that.
>>>> --
>>>> Wonko
>>> 
>>> Thought it was worth a try.  After all, if I cast a vote on an incorrect
>>> version of the proposal, the existentialists might argue my vote was
>> cast on a
>>> nonexistent proposal, and therefore my vote on that nonexistent proposal
>> can't
>>> exist either.  Certainly, if I cast my vote on a nonexistent proposal, I
>>> didn't cast it on the actual, correct proposal.
>>> 
>>> Gee...is existence a dimension?  And does it have values other than 0
>> and 1?
>>> 
>>> Glotmorf
>> 
>> Actually, R4 - "Every modification to a revisable object that does not
>> eliminate it from play creates a new version of it."
>> 
>> OTOH, R19 - "Proposals may only be revised by their original author."
>> suggests that the Admin may not be able to rectify things at all.
>> 
>> --
>> Wonko
> 
> What about r255, the typo rule?  One could argue that if a document has a typo
> in it, it's a nonexistent form taking up space until the new, typo-free form
> can come and take its place.  Hence, fixing a typo isn't a revision...it's a
> rectification.
> 
> Glotmorf
> 

Revision isn't defined, so we must use the standard english definition - To
revise is to reconsider and change or modify. The proposal said one thing,
then changed to say another; it was clearly modified.

-- 
Wonko