> The question is, if Murphy doesn't vote, whether the PRESENT stops us > from getting to AGAINST (strict perl-or logic interpretation), or whether > the AGAINST somehow overrides the PRESENT (common usage/more common sense > interpretation and probably the intent). > > -G.
That's a rather unfortunate feature of endorsement. Arguments: Since the original document specified in particular a "Perl-style 'or'", rather than simply a more general type of "or", the message presented a reasonably unambiguous intent to follow a strict logical interpretation. In that case, the question at play is whether this intent is stronger than the intent to vote "what Murphy votes, otherwise AGAINST". -Turiski
