Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: NWEEK 38 BALLOT

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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 
> > deal
> > with the prop being shelved and hanging around another nweek.
> <snip>
> > That can also be rectified.  Personally, however, I'd change it to 
> > "Players
> > who 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