Without objection I do so.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 28, 2012, at 10:44 AM, omd wrote:
> I intend, without objection, to ratify the following document: { Each
> proposal listed below is in the Proposal Pool. } The document is
> incorrect because
> (a) 7218-7229 were already distributed, but t
On 05/29/2012 11:50 AM, omd wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Pavitra wrote:
>> On 05/28/2012 09:29 PM, omd wrote:
> 7246 3 omd Adoption reassociation
AGAINST
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Because it looks like a trivial rewording to no effect, which makes me
>> suspect a scam.
On 29 May 2012 17:45, omd wrote:
> Why?
In reaction to the allegation of scammitude, presumably.
I vote AGAINST on all proposals with even numbers and FOR all
proposals with odd numbers, then retract all those votes and vote
PRESENT on every proposal.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:01 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, omd wrote:
>[...]
>> 7244 3 omd Possibly fix costs
> PRESENT
I change my vote on this to AGAINST.
> 7218 2 BuckyBot, etc. Elder Things
FOR
> 7219 3 omd, etc. Untitled
FOR
> 7220 2 omd, etc. Effective ballot fees
PRESENT
> 7221 2 omd, etc. Vote early and often
PRESENT
> 7222 1 omd Golem fix
FOR
> 7223 1 omd Tapping the brakes still considere
I vote PRESENT on proposals 7218–7229.
—Machiavelli "En-Em"
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:44 PM, omd wrote:
> 7218 2 BuckyBot, etc. Elder Things
FOR
> 7219 3 omd, etc. Untitled
AGAINST (guess i shouldn't have distributed this one, it's out of date)
> 7220 2 omd, etc. Effective ballot fees
FOR
> 7221 2 omd, etc. Vote early and often
F
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:44 PM, omd wrote:
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it. For this decision, the eligible
> voters are the active first-class players at the time of this
> distribution, the vote collector is the Assessor, and
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, omd wrote:
> I intend, without objection, to ratify the following document: { Each
> proposal listed below is in the Proposal Pool. } The document is
> incorrect because
> (a) 7218-7229 were already distributed, but they failed quorum; I
> think they deserve to ge
