In that message, you didn’t state a number of coins; you stated a hash. Stating a hash is different from stating that-which-was-hashed, I think, at least when the hash cannot readily be decrypted by those to whom the statement is directed.
If you said the hash out loud to yourself, or “stated” the underlying text to the computer performing the hashing algorithm, then I think that yields a DISMISS for the same reasons as 3714, at least until you give us information sufficient to decrypt. > On Mar 5, 2019, at 12:41 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote: > > CoE on coin balances: As per the CFJ 3714 judgement, proof that I stated > the number of coins earned for my last-but-one Herald's Report (in a timely > manner for the reward) is found here: > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-February/040091.html > > [Note: I'm not trying to be annoying about the quanging thing here - > I've been trying to write a general action-by-hash rule for a bit and want > to know if rules need changing wrt standards of evidence and revealing > info and whatnot]. > > >> On 3/5/2019 6:50 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: >> COIN BALANCES >> ======================================================================== >> This section self-ratifies.