Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Fwd: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122

2018-10-29 Thread ATMunn
Fair points. It just doesn't quite feel right to me. I might change my vote, maybe not. On 10/28/2018 10:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: On Sun, 28 Oct 2018, ATMunn wrote: 8122 Murphy 3.0 Middle of the road AGAINST, this doesn't have any actual effect at the moment and it just

DIS: Re: OFF: Fwd: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122

2018-10-28 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Sun, 28 Oct 2018, ATMunn wrote: > > 8122 Murphy 3.0 Middle of the road > AGAINST, this doesn't have any actual effect at the moment and it just > complicates the math for the Assessor. It has a couple current effects: >From R2556: > The voting strength of a player on

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Fwd: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122

2018-10-28 Thread Kerim Aydin
Thinking it through, I don't think there's a practical effect worth a CFJ - remembering that you can't "create" new proposals by distribution, I'd say the first one was a correct distribution, the second one failed to distribute (because those proposals weren't in the pool), but both will

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Fwd: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122

2018-10-28 Thread Aris Merchant
It was intended to imply that I hadn’t sent it to the official forum, and was now doing so. An abbreviation for “hey, I realized I sent this to BUS, and now I want it on OFF for the official record”. I’ll admit that it’s slightly ambiguous though. You can CFJ if you want whether I attempted to

DIS: Re: OFF: Fwd: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122

2018-10-28 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Sun, 28 Oct 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > TTttOF. Hrm, the sending to BUS was clearly effective, so what does re-sending it to the OF with the sort of abbreviation that implies you're doing it in the second message do?