On 8/8/2021 3:33 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > The rules actually say "clearly specify" at one other point (Rule 107, > Initiating Agoran Decisions). In this case, while "exactly which part of > this message constitutes the text of the intended proposal" is somewhat > unclear, it isn't substantially unclear; any reasonable interpretation > still leads to a proposal that,
I intend to motion to reconsider this judgement with 2 support. In this judgement, the judge is (1) claiming the text is clearly specified, but (2) then says it's somewhat unclear, but then (3) says any reasonable interpretation works, but (4) then doesn't actually give an interpretation, that's not clarifying at all (in direct contradiction to the stated judgement). Regardless of the fact that multiple interpretations might lead to a proposal that gives the same result, that does not make a single text clear, and a single text is required. If "any reasonable" interpretation is possible, then there's no clear single interpretation, which the rule requires. -G.
