On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:24 PM, omd <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote: > I belatedly judge CFJs 3215-16 TRUE, because as I mentioned shortly > after they were called, there are more unusual ways to introduce > proposal or cause rule changes that would prevent Agora from being > ossified in any case.
Did you mean to judge 3215 FALSE? If removing "which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool" wouldn't make Agora ossified, and the Ruleset doesn't self-ratify, I don't see why it would still be there when I called 3215.
