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?
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.
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.
> s/becthe/be the/
> Other than that, the proposals look good to me. Be sure to resubmit
> them, I'll definitly vote FOR them (unless other issues arise).
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.