On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 17:53, Sean Hunt<ride...@gmail.com> wrote: > Roger Hicks wrote: >> Which is the reaction I expected and part of the reason I've held off >> suggesting it. Though I would like to hear your reasons why you think >> it is a bad idea. >> >> BobTHJ > > Actions take place on the lists for a reason. If actions take place > off-list, others have no way of verifying them. > I agree that actions take place on the lists for a reason, but I think those reasons can be mitigated. Under the system I suggest all actions (and attempted actions) are logged and all are verifiable. Also, there would still be a weekly report to the lists showing all actions performed off-list.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 17:59, comex<com...@gmail.com> wrote: > The historical record is also destroyed. This is mitigated if the > webpage contains a complete log of all attempted actions and their > effects (or not), but only partially. > Again, my web-interface is already set up to record all actions and their effects, even those which fail - and can even track the state of actions which are under dispute. If you couple this with regular reporting of all those actions to the list I think this safely avoids any issues (asset holdings would still only be ratified via the on-list report which could be CoE'd). Note that I don't suggest using a web-interface for Agora defined actions, only those actions defined in contract. There's a good reason we use an e-mail list and not a website to play Agora and I'm not suggesting we change that. The primary actions that I think would be good to process via web are: * Milling * Harvesting (though the SoA's response to certain harvests would still be done on-list) * Subsidization requests These are the items that tend to clog the list with a lot of messages. Agora is more friendly to new players when the message count is lower. BobTHJ
