|Daniel Lepage on 8 Apr 2003 21:15:01 -0000|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: NWEEK 38 BALLOT|
On Monday, April 7, 2003, at 06:51 PM, Adam Hill wrote:
It was clarified. Bd got the fix I suggested in on time.My mistake. I go by the version that appears on Current Proposals, and it hadn't been updated when I read it. With the changes, I support the proposal.
Note that this means nothing unless you actually change your vote...
I believe that's in the realm of administarial rectification. And although people (including myself) should take care of this kind of stuff beforehand, I think it would be easier on Dave just to rectify it than have to dealwith the prop being shelved and hanging around another nweek.<snip>That can also be rectified. Personally, however, I'd change it to "Playerswho are in a ZATR or ZOE and are in ...", adding the "who are" instead of removing the "are".[begin snobbish mode] Personally, I'd rather not pass a proposal that has typos and such. That's how we ended up with all those "recieves" in the ruleset.Also, your recommended change is perfectly fine with me. As long as the grammar is proper.
Since the Admin can fix any grammatical error simply by declaring it fixed, passing a typoed proposal is no great problem. As for those 'recieves', if you give Dave a list of where they are I'm sure he can fix them sooner or later.
And I think Orc's right - it's easier for Dave to simply tweak a word in the database than to recognize and count votes for a fix proposal forcing em to tweak said word.
-- Wonko _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss