podtoken electorate with the -p flag

[buhtignew]

I've tried to test the podtoken electorate with the -p flag.
However I haven't found a proposal that has a different voter's weight in the phases 1 and 2.
So I can't really tell whether the command reports the differences accurately, I assume it is.

_
What I've noticed is that it's possible to use whatever number after the -p flag.
For instance if I run podtoken electorate 472f2420820c99333969bba0ecb7fc4080b7e2f6d8bb65756070a31b450b7432 -p 12412414 it basically reports the data for the phase 1, but mentions the phase 12412414 in the output:

'Enabled voters and weights for proposal '
'472f2420820c99333969bba0ecb7fc4080b7e2f6d8bb65756070a31b450b7432, '
'for voting phase 12412414'


mie75nFHrNAHHKfQ141fWfWozdMnaec8mb: 3474.57
mmBwLVyqZWuUDuTpmmpzBvT41azKBevZhh: 342.0

Note: The weight depends on the adjusted dPoD and voting token balances at the start of the epoch 1258 which started at block 140896.
Weights are shown in minimum token units.

Maybe we can make it clear that the data refers to the voting phase 1 by editing the line for voting phase 12412414 in the output.

_
Another thing I've noticed is that the different proposals sees to have a different duration, so the epoch for the standard dPoD token and dt_short token is different on the same block.
For instance the epoch in case of podtoken electorate -s 140900 command is 176 and in case of podtoken electorate 3369f3eb703656c0b46b613dcfb4df78fc05657a0b75f44551634de6321d9d9c -s 140900 command is 1258.
I assume it should work like that.
_
There is a line in the podtoken electorate -h (specifically in the pacli podtoken electorate PROPOSAL -p [PHASE] explanation section):

PROPOSAL can be an ID, a local label, a part of the description or the mini ID (with -m option).

However it seems like the command recognize correctly the mini-id without the -m flag (if I run podtoken electorate 472f2420820c9933 -p for instance).
On the opposite the podtoken electorate -m 472f2420820c9933 -p command reports Error: Proposal not found., while it's not clear whether in case of the podtoken electorate 472f2420820c9933 -p -m command if the -m is basically ignored or not - the output is the same of the podtoken electorate 472f2420820c9933 -p.
Maybe we can edit the line in the help by cutting out the mention of the -m flag and also drop the -m flag from the Flags section, if technically possible and pertinent, as well.
_
After created Proposal's label and mini-id testing thread I've checked how many proposals would find the podtoken electorate with the -p flag in case of the partial or full description (for instance podtoken electorate slm -p and proposal period "stablecoins on slm!!!!!!" -p), and as for the proposal show slm -i and differently from the proposal show slm -f the command outputs only one proposal and not the full list.
So we should probably cut off the mentioning of the selection of the proposal by the description from the Name section or as alternative enable that functionality.