Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Nweek 60 Ballot

[Zarpint <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't mind at all, SkArcher -- usually props get shelved when just a small
change would work to fix them. If it costs bandwidth, there's no reason to
fix them, since it's a waste of bandwidth that could be used for new proposals.
The Bandwidth was already paid once, and the prop didn't fail, so it doesn't
make sense to charge bandwidth for it again.

Besides, I never seem to have enough bandwidth when I really need it.

--
Zarpint Jeremy Cook    "All thy toiling only breeds new dreams, new dreams;
mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx         there is no truth saving in thine own heart."
dynamicwind.com               --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, SkArcher wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 01:13:39 -0500 (EST), Zarpint <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> Proposal 1830/0: Not Again! (SkArcher)



-- 
Zarpint Jeremy Cook    "All thy toiling only breeds new dreams, new dreams;
mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx         there is no truth saving in thine own heart."
dynamicwind.com               --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, SkArcher wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 01:13:39 -0500 (EST), Zarpint <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> Proposal 1830/0: Not Again! (SkArcher)
> > NO (resubmitting a shelved prop should not cost bandwidth)
>
> Mind if I ask why? Before Wonko redid the voting procedures and
> (inadvertantly?) removed the restriction, Shelved props were listed as
> counting as half a prop for the purposes of Bandwidth. I have merely
> rewritten the old rule to fit in with the modern standards presented in
> the current ruleset.
>
>
> SkArcher
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss