Subject: [MacroNomic] Votes

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 00:33:25 -0700 (PDT)

In keeping with the tradition, I am going to post my votes publically,
however I will wait until tomorrow to do so, so that I can read and think
on the proposals.

I suspect when we go to 'batches' (if we do) that votes will cease to be
easily trackable publically.  (unless I'm misunderstanding batches, it
looks like it will install a daily update system for props).  Henry, could
you clarify?

In the mean time, I have updated the assets page (and will upload it
shortly).

--JT

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

---

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:34:33 -0400

>looks like it will install a daily update system for props).  Henry, could
	Batches allow for daily updates, since I don't want to limit the
SoT.  But there's nothing forcing the SoT to update more than once a week.
There will be a batch every day, but 6/7 of them could be empty.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Thank heavens, the sun has gone in, and I don't have to go out and
enjoy it.
		-Logan Pearsall Smith

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 09:13:48 -0700 (PDT)

>There will be a batch every day, but 6/7 of them could be empty.

Okay.. the reason I was confused is that 'a batch is all the proposals
that become reactive or become active 2 days in the future'.  If there are
daily batches, that seemed odd, but if there weren't, why did you create 6
preceding daily batches :)

--JT

---

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:28:12 -0400

>preceding daily batches :)
	The quote you used is so that we can keep going the way we have
been.  It means that reactive proposals end 7 days later, and active one 5
days.  The preceding ones were mostly because I wasn't sure what would
happen otherwise.  It talks about batches being created when another one is
destroyed, and that made sure that there wouldn't be any problems.  Also,
if a proposal from the batch before that had gone reactive, it would have
been neccessary to avoid problems.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:00:14 -0700 (PDT)

>days.  The preceding ones were mostly because I wasn't sure what would

The thing is, the way I read it, shouldn't have been, a batch is all
proposals that become active or that became reactive 2 days in the past?

The phrasing you used seems to move the activation of new proposals 2 days
forward, instead of pushing the reactivation back 2 days.

--JT

---

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 13:19:56 -0400

>forward, instead of pushing the reactivation back 2 days.
	Oh I see what you mean.  If I did it that way then reactive
proposals wouldn't be in a batch for two days after they're created.  Also
it would mean batches would last 5 days instead of 7.  What happens is that
on the day a batch ends, a new batch is created with all the proposals
which become reactive on that day.  Then, two days later, a bunch of
additional proposal become active and join that batch.  5 days after that,
all those proposals become inactive (or reactive) and the cycle starts
again.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:19:11 -0700 (PDT)

>all those proposals become inactive (or reactive) and the cycle starts

Okay.. it just wasn't clear from the rule.

--JT