On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:04 AM Luis Ressel <ara...@aixah.de> wrote:
> Hi Alexis, > > I didn't distribute your proposals because they both contain some > typos (see below); please retract and resubmit them. By the way, your > MUA ruined the layout of your proposals, so I had to reformat them. > Please adjust its settings accordingly. > Not sure if this revised version worked? and... what? > Fixed. Good catch. This looks like a bug in the current ruleset. > It would be if With Notice was used. s/month/monthly/. Also, it is common practice to reject proposals that > create a new office without providing an officeholder, so please add > "Install Alexis to the Superintentend office" or something similar. > Done. I'd prefer if this part was moved to a separate proposal. After all, I > don't see why we should remove the Prime Minister's double voting power > for elections. > Because of the same rules issue that affects Speaker, e doesn't have double voting power for elections. It is not so obviously a bug, however, so I decided to leave the PM's powers unchanged. No objection to expanding them as a separate proposal, though. Some superfluous words. > Fixed. > s/becthe/be the/ > Fixed. > Other than that, the proposals look good to me. Be sure to resubmit > them, I'll definitly vote FOR them (unless other issues arise). > Yay! ^_^ Also, someone else asked why not allow the acting on behalf to be conditional: because restrictions breed creativity. In the past, Agora has had various methods of allowing for acting on behalf in specified circumstances. If you have conditional acting-on-behalf, then you can effectively create arbitrary rules-enforced contracts that way (e.g. "You can act on behalf of me to transfer you $X, as long as you have transferred me $Y first."). The goal is to create a system that can't be (directly) used in such a manner, forcing people to be a little more inventive. Alexis
