On Tue, 2021-06-08, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > I pay a fee of 1 Extra Vote to Buy Strength. > I pay a fee of 1 Extra Vote to Buy Strength. > I pay a fee of 1 Extra Vote to Buy Strength. > I pay a fee of 1 Extra Vote to Buy Strength. > I pay a fee of 1 Extra Vote to Buy Strength.
>From the email headers (irrelevant sections replaced by [...]): > Received: from mxout25.s.uw.edu [...] by vps.qoid.us [...] > Tue, 08 Jun 2021 15:48:02 +0000 > Received: from mail-pl1-f200.google.com [...] > by mxout25.s.uw.edu [...] Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:45:07 -0700 Can anyone remember the precedent on whether a delay at this point in the chain of email relays delays the time at which the message is considered to have been sent? This affects whether or not G. had any Extra Votes on em to spend, because the delay pushed it past the economic reset. (FWIW, I think equitably, this expenditure ought to count as having been done in time, because the delay was likely unexpected, and outside G.'s control. I can't remember what the actual precedent says, though, and there are some issues with "would other players have had an opportunity to react to this?".) -- ais523
