On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 18:56, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Would anyone complain/object if I ratified a "false" Herald's Report > that claims the Notices of Honor received during the Troubles were > successful? > > Looking at the message list that Murphy nicely assembled for Proposals > 8278-8279, I kinda feel like the easiest way is for officers to just > ratify individual reports in the "fairest" way - e.g. coins for work > done were actually earned, honor was actually changed, etc., but > elections that were perturbed didn't happen/can be restarted (as > that's more fair). Generally leaving it up to each officer to figure > out what's the "most fair"? Saves all monkeying around with fora. > > -G.
I'm happy to stop CoEing the aspects of my Treasuror reports that relate to The Troubles, but I don't want to let them self-ratify until we know whether Jason Cobb got 18000 Coins. (Also, if someone calls a CFJ about Proposal 8277's attempt to transfer coins, it could be quite a while before we have a self-ratified Treasuror report.) I'm inclined just to assume messages during The Troubles weren't sent since my reports already assume that. But I don't mind karma updates having worked. -- - Falsifian
