You never pended it, but you most certainly created it, which adds it
to the proposal pool. To quote your message "I create and intend to
Rubberstamp in my capcity as Notary without 3 objections the following
proposal."
-Aris
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:38 PM Ned Strange wrote:
>
> I never
I never actually pended it or submitted it to the proposal pool
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> I submit the following proposal. V.J., you might want to retract
> yours, as I've fixed a ton of bugs and included it in this.
>
> -Aris
> ---
>
> Title: Minimalist Contracts
Here's another draft. I've tweaked it to weaken the requirement by
adding "directly", so presumably the tricks people have been pulling
with hash-triggered pledges and the like will still work. I also upped
the power, to show that I'm increasing the power of a rule past 3.0. I
remain open to
Nope, although they used to be. The rule cleanup rule was reverted to
an earlier form by Proposal 8000 (technically, the new one was
repealed and the old one reenacted). In my book, this side effect is
really a good thing. This is easily one of the most common types of
errors that needs to be
That's right. Sorry OscarMeyr, I was very tired when I wrote it.
~Corona
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Ned Strange
wrote:
> that cfj decided that the sillyness of an action is an inextricable
> conditional.
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Benjamin Schultz
> wrote:
> > Testing the
aren't people specifically banned from changing rules to all caps or
from them in this way
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> Despite this being a meaningful semantic change, it's also a blatantly
> obvious typo fix. Without objection, I intend to change the text
> "SHALL"
I bid 1 coin
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 18:05 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I withdraw my previous bid and instead bid 1 coin.
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On June 21, 2018 12:03 AM, Ned Strange wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I bid 15 coins
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:54 AM,
that cfj decided that the sillyness of an action is an inextricable conditional.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Benjamin Schultz
wrote:
> Testing the lmits of Sillyness by contract, I act on behalf of VJ Rada to
> issue a trust token to me. Because the open-ended nature of the contract
> is
Additional gratuity:
There are currently several people who can push to those links (via GitHub)
without the push/overwrite being visible or evident to someone following the
link. However, the underlying github repo (not findable from those links)
would show the commit history that can be
I, for one, would be willing to experiment with it, if we made sure that
there was strict protections both technically and in the rules to avoid
tampering or loss of information.
On 06/20/2018 05:17 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 17:11 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 17:11 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> I raised the issue of having a certain GitHub repository as a public
> forum and people opposed it because it would not be within the TDoC
> of a member and it would break the precedent of mailing lists being
> public
I favor this with significant deference to anyone else.
On 06/20/2018 03:16 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:10 PM Alex Smith
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
>>>
I raised the issue of having a certain GitHub repository as a public
forum and people opposed it because it would not be within the TDoC of a
member and it would break the precedent of mailing lists being public fora.
On 06/20/2018 03:32 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700,
Just as some added fun, note that I found an error (in the "last change" date,
so not something required to be reported) - I pushed the fix so the current
*document* behind the link is not the one it was when I published the links.
Probably a moot point but there it is.
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:21 PM Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 13:17 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
> > wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, I've opened the FLR in question so you couldn't
> > > now change it and have me see the new version
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 13:17 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
> wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I've opened the FLR in question so you couldn't
> > now change it and have me see the new version (and the use of Github as
> > an intermediary, who keep backups
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Well considering I've still got a terminal window open, I could
> > change the link contents instantly to anything before most people
> > will have seen it. Definitely not out of my
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> Right, the message needs to contain enough context to find the action.
> I don't think that's a problem with the message in question, though.
So first, I don't think you could argue that I published a Document that
contained a report. So for the
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Well considering I've still got a terminal window open, I could
> change the link contents instantly to anything before most people
> will have seen it. Definitely not out of my TDOC if the content of
> those links is the only evidence.
>
>
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> > revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> >
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:10 PM Alex Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> > revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> >
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
>
> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt
>
> I'm not publishing them,
22 matches
Mail list logo
