Re: resounding nothingness
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 10:52:14PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:31:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I am confused. Did not several people second earlier versions of your,
> > and others', proposals?
> The most any proposal got was 4 seconds. Five would be needed to
> introduce an amendment.
> Also, while I personally think my post recent proposal is better, but it's
> gotten no seconds. That's certainly not enough to have it introduced.
> I'm somewhat ambivalent about my earlier proposals -- I think they're
> better than having no proposal at all, but like I said I prefer my most
> recent one (it's simpler and cleaner, in my opinion -- which means it's
> less likely to introduce some ambiguity that I've not thought through).
I think the problem is that you got really confusing people by changing
every now and then. Maybe some clarification would be good, and once a
final version is there, then make a call for a proposal.