On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:22 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 17:12, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Elliott Hird > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Also, you have too much power as is. > > > > What about a netural third party of some kind? Recordkeepors could > > become something more like auditors, verifying that entered > > transactions actually match their interpretation of the emails to the > > list? > > > Fine with me. That is more or less what I do anyway. Although I have > participated in the AAA and RBOA in the past it has been some time > since I have made any transactions for my own benefit. Again, I'm > happy to turn this over to someone else for the sake of having > everything under one recordkeepor. > > I just spent an entire 8 hour workday sorting through this mess. If I > were an accountant and Agora were a paying job I'd be fine with that, > but it isn't. Unless a reasonable solution can be devised I'll likely > step down from most of my recordkeeping positions. > ehird: I'd like to suggest that maybe you're being a bit petty here. It's nice for you to do all the PBA-related work, but it causes a huge mess when people transact with multiple banks, or indeed do anything involving the PBA and any other asset. This causes a lot of trouble when more than one recordkeepor is involved, as it takes many iterations to work out the resulting gamestate.
Personally I'd like to see the whole lot recordkept by the PNP, or TNP2, or some other codenomic, but someone would have to write the code for that. Possibly I would at some point, but not some time soon. -- ais523
