On Fri, 2023-11-24 at 03:26 +0000, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I vote as follows: > > > 9033* 4st, Janet, nix, snail 3.0 It's been 4 years, Agora. 4 > > YEARS. > AGAINST. I will explain why to a-d.
So there was a minor mistake in the recent dictatorship scam attempt, which I pointed out as part of a counterscam attempt. It is possible/probable that the distribution of this proposal (and all proposals recently) contained the same mistake; and it is also possible that me pointing out the mistake to counterscam the dictatorship also invalidated this decision. I don't want there to be ambiguity about whether or not a ruleset ratification succeeded, especially because those things have to be written to work under as many potential versions of the rules as possible. As such, I'm voting against the decision for reasons related to the decision, rather than reasons related to the proposal to which it pertains. I encourage the authors/Promotor to try again, with a more carefully worded distribution message. (This message was sent to DIS: because it might otherwise potentially be a claim of error, under some past rulesets; sending it to a-d removes any risk of that, and I'd rather avoid any additional sources of ambiguity.) -- ais523
