Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I don't think the issue was that you didn't mention it. It was more that we assumed it was similar to the previous instructions, and we glossed over it in an effort to get to the vote. People just missed it and didn't flag that it seems contrary to our understanding of how things were going to move forward.
If we can't have unanimous consent to redo the vote and we can't move a motion with the same wording, I wonder if you would accept a motion from the floor with slightly different wording. Would that be in order?