| Peter Cooper Jr. on Tue, 12 May 2015 01:14:41 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] Prop: A Simple Fix |
On May 11, 2015, at 9:11 PM, Jonathan David Amery <jdamery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Proposal(__A Simple Fix__) {{
> Create a new rule in section 4:
>
> Rule(__Proposal Ordering__) {{
> Open Proposals are resolved in reverse numerical order.
> }}
> }}
Is this intended to clarify Rule 4-6’s “(in Proposal Number order)” to say that the order meant is “reverse numerical order”? Having two places that try to set the order there seems odd. And I’ve been assigning Numbers in a structured way like “1-12” for the 12th proposal of the first nweek’s ballot, in much the same way that the Numbers I’ve been assigning to Rules have a structure to them to help indicate which Section they’re in. I’m all in favor of a fix (the current system is really terrible if I assign a Proposal the Number “Fred” or if I fail to assign a Proposal a Number, with or without your Prop passing), but I think we may need a more complex fix than your simple one.
--
Peter C.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss