coppro wrote: > ais523 wrote: >> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 16:30 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote: >>> I vote FOR on the decision on whether to adopt proposal 6514. >> Thus forcing me to attempt to use a scam before it's been judged whether >> it worked or not (Murphy could resolve the proposal as ADOPTED right >> now, AFAICT), which is always a risky proposition. This message is >> designed to not increase the ambiguity any more than is necessary to >> maintain the mousetrap if it does indeed exist. > > Wasn't it quorate? I'll let Murphy CoE on this one, but I just want to ask.
According to my records, at the end of the first week, it needed 5 and had only 4.
