7437 1 Roujo(untitled)
FOR
7438 2 ais523 Fix adoption index tracking
FOR
7439 1 woggle he -> e
FOR
7440 1 woggle When ., -> When ,
FOR
7441 1 Walker (untitled)
FOR
7442 1 scshunt No Recordkeeping Burden
AGAINST (missing "create a rule wit
On 22 May 2013, at 21:15, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On May 22, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Charles Walker wrote:
>>
>> AGAINST. I would rather see the return of a simple contract Rule than
>> the proliferation of numerous different mechanisms for economic
>> activity. We could simply enact a Rule saying: "Pla
I hereby vote as follows:
On 5/20/13 14:40 , omd wrote:
> NUM AI AUTHOR TITLE
>
> 7437 1 Roujo(untitled)
ENDORSE THE AMBASSADOR AT LARGE
> 7438 2 ais523 Fix adoption index tracking
ENDORSE THE REGISTRAR
> 7439 1 woggle he -> e
FOR
> 7440 1 woggle When .,
> 7437 1 Roujo(untitled)
PRESENT; would also prefer "Ended".
> 7438 2 ais523 Fix adoption index tracking
AGAINST. This seems ugly: surely just make AI not a switch? Switches
should be things we want to track.
> 7439 1 woggle he -> e
FOR
> 7440 1 woggle When ., -> W
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:46 PM, omd wrote:
>> 7439 1 woggle he -> e
> AGAINST per my comments about rewards
>> 7440 1 woggle When ., -> When ,
> AGAINST
I change my vote on both of these to FOR per woggle's promise. :)
On May 20, 2013 5:46 PM, "omd" wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:40 PM, omd wrote:
> > 7442 1 scshunt No Recordkeeping Burden
>
> CORRECTION: This proposal does not exist, as scshunt withdrew it and
> purported to resubmit it after inserting "'Enact a Rule with the
> text:', or other wo
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:40 PM, omd wrote:
> 7437 1 Roujo(untitled)
FOR, although I would prefer "Ended"
> 7438 2 ais523 Fix adoption index tracking
AGAINST
> 7439 1 woggle he -> e
AGAINST per my comments about rewards
> 7440 1 woggle When ., -> When ,
AGAINST
>
