It could be argued that this proposal allows infinite popularity for having the highest in any attribute…  I’ll leave it to others to decide wether that is the case.

I think it is pretty clear. The most a single olympian could get from this would be 7 popularity points, but this would be extremely unlikely. But if e had 10,10,10,10, for instance, and no one had more than 10 of any attribute, and no one had a total sum greater than 40, then e would gain a popularity point for each of the four attributes, and 3 for having the highest sum.

My concern is…

“If an Olympian has more of an attribute than any other Olympian, e gains 1 popularity point. “

Ill gain my one.  Now, Ill gain my one, since this is still true.  And again… etc

Since no one has made a vote that would change the outcome for this proposal, I have edited it to remove ambiguity.

I didn’t see it before it was disambiguated. I’m fine with it now.

“Since no one has made a vote that would change the outcome for this proposal, I have edited it to remove ambiguity.”

Oh no! That’s illegal! How annoying.

Basically, any comments on an official proposal, whether or not they have votes, prevent the author from editing it.

I don’t see this in the rules. Can you point this out for me?

If no Olympian has commented on it, an official post may be altered or removed by its author;

1.7

Ah. Take two

Yeah. According to these rules, any time this is true your popularity would jump as high as possible. Because the if clause would still be valid.