The same happened a long time ago when inblue posted something that I was hiding proposals. We all know now that this rule only affected pool.biblepay.org's display characteristics for a replacement poll. It was never for the core wallet (core wallet has never pulled any proposals from an API ever). And it was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month. Then I saw some kind of "proof" in the post with txid's showing that I hid the first proposal. Yes, it was proof that two proposals were in the system and both were able to be seen in the core wallet. The latter one was valid for voting.
So as an example, if inblue said "Hey Rob, could you please explain why I see this first instance and this instance"? I would have never deleted the post. It was written like "you bast***, you have now been Proven to be a Liar!". Btw, I have already forgiven him for that as can be seen in the QT thread.
Ah, here we go again... You really shouldn't have used this as an example, now bringing attention to that event again. This sentence of yours is all what is needed to be done with this conflict:
It was a feature for a replacement proposal so that vendors can ask a proposal be reentered when we see we are going overbudget at the end of the month.
So clearly you
didn't use the feature as intended, since we were
not going overbudget that month. Even if you argue that we
were going overbudget, the proposal was immediately reentered for the same month, instead of waiting for the next one. But even if you argue that it could now fit the budget after a tiny BBP reduction,
the proposal was evidently rejected and could not win, so it
shouldn't be reentered. You misused that feature
because the proposal received a lot of negative votes, but you really wanted it to succeed because you already paid from your pocket. It's very simple.
And saying you "forgave" me for my undeniable blockchain proof, what a joke, you are a master of manipulation, because the situation is the other way around - it's only others who can forgive you for your misconduct. You know, you would look like a bigger man if you admitted your mistake and moved on, instead of raging.
I have clearly been the bigger man in the respect of how I handled your replies (your mean spirited unwanted comments) at various times.
Incorrect above. The feature has always been there in "pool.biblepay.org" specifically so that the Proposals list is a distinct list of votable proposals that fits within the budget. The only way a proposal becomes hidden is if a duplicate is entered with the same name in the same period that is newer -- and it is always entered because the old one will cause us to be over-budget. As I said before and maintain until now, Ive been asked to re-enter proposals so that we make the payment for compassion (so that we are not over-budget).
You are being argumentative and continue to try to prove that I'm doing something nefarious here.
You need to accept the fact that you are wrong about this, that you didn't ask about it specifically first, instead making an assumption about me - then attacking me.
If you are trying to say this particular proposal is a "one off" and I did something special with it compared to compassions re-entries that is incorrect - many have been duplicates (not one) and all entered with reduced amounts to make the budget work.
Edit:
Ok, I went the extra mile and located the root cause of this disagreement. It is that your attack says "you've hidden the previous proposal from your website and made a new one, misleading users that there are not so many negative votes on that proposals, and rigging the voting system in your favor, so that your proposal could pass. This is the 100% undeniable truth, with proof on the blockchain which will never go away, no matter how hard you want it.".
So no that is untrue, because the feature exists for replacement proposals with lower amounts that can be re-voted to fit within the monthly budget, and is limited to the display characteristics of pool.biblepay.org.
On a side note: Here is why I wanted you to e-mail me. I don't want this thread cluttered with character attacks and infighting! I would have explained the Hope for widows proposal specifically if you would taken this seriously and not attempted to make a mockery of this forum. Thats why I deal with emails, they should be escalated first, and worked out and if you still dont get a resolution, then go ahead and post here in a constructive way.
Regarding the actual hope for widows proposal: I located it and you are incorrect, I see that :
I entered it on 10-13 for 481,540BBP originally, and it was voted down with -21 votes. On 10-22 I re-entered A new instance of it with a LOWER AMOUNT (as we do with all resubmitted proposals) for 381,540 (100,000 less) which is a NEW AMOUNT, and we still had plenty of time for everyone to see it and vote on it, and THIS WAS TO MAKE IT FIT WITHIN THE BUDGET Because we Did Not enter Compassions amount until 10-23! So I am basically saying- look this group voted my original amount down, we need 4.34 MM for compassion, Ill try to go for Less, and enter compassion right now! Both proposals of HFW were visible in the core wallet (as they always were) and neither were hidden in the core wallet. The Second instance in the Pool was the only one visible because it was a Duplicate proposal according to the Business Rule. Any sanc should be on top of voting if they wanted to Re-vote this precious proposal that I staked the money up front for hope-for-widows for and I also say it was pretty depressing to vote this proposal down in light of who we were helping. And finally, if You entered a proposal for HFW for 500,000 and it was voted down, you could have emailed me that you want one for 400,000 and want another chance to get reimbursed since you lost, and I would have Paid the 2,500 fee for it and entered it for you in the pool (this feature is not for me, its for every vendor and every user). Its automatic.
So I just wanted to see if I posted anything on the forum after re-entering HFW, and I did say on the forum: "no problem I will re-enter the losing proposal for a new amount and tithe the rest"
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.47153740. So as you can see, I was not hiding the re-entered amount.
, i'm locked now too and it seems that support is not working
