📅 Original date posted:2016-02-04 📝 Original message:On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Various changes have been made based on initial input. > Further review and re-review is of course welcome. These recent edits definitely guide us towards less hard feelings when comments are offered, without excessive policy structure. [BIP 2:] > A process BIP may change status from Draft to Active when it > achieves rough consensus on the mailing list. Is this mix of wiki and mailing list intentional? If so, the wiki talk page is meant to be a self-curated permanent record of support and dissent, but second-order reply commentary might fall either on the wiki or the mailing list? Mediawiki offers watchlists on a polling model, and there is some email support [1], but it would be nice of a BIP author to at least gather new/edited comment titles and report them to bitcoin-dev once a week, during review. Someone has to stare at the diffs. [1] www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Page_change_notification BIP 2 should ask that all current and future forums that BIP authors might choose for review have indisputable records of moderation and user edits. Is dump.bitcoin.it a sufficient public record of contentious moderation or user cross-comment editing? It seems like as long as the wiki as a whole is verifiable, it would suffice.