Originally Posted by
kipper
Here's a concept for a well-defined and approved procedure... If it's anything more than fixing a typo, the motion is withdrawn, corrected, and then proposed and seconded again.
But that wastes time. There's no reason to have to start all over again, especially if people have already voted, for a minor change. Why waste days when a simple fix will take care of the issue a lot quicker?
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.