Add Rules

[IstoraMandiri]

Fixes #18 , please review and make suggestions.

[ghost]

Removal of line 53 -> 58

This is content for @ETC_Network imho

[IstoraMandiri]

Looks like @bobsummerwill agrees with you @w1g0

https://twitter.com/BobSummerwill/status/1581633468441976836

Very unlikely. The account is NOT for promotion of specific projects. The website is there as a directory for people to find things.

I wonder if there are limits to this though - what about the examples given in the comments above?

[ghost]

Didn't check the tweets, and examples are "coming soon", so which ones are you referring to?

[IstoraMandiri]

Perhaps you missed it because I created it as part of a review. I'll stick to regular comments from now.

I figured this one would be controversial, but the reasoning I have it like this is that I think that it becomes difficult to draw a line. Should this account really never tweet out third party projects?

If Mantis or Besu had a release or security problem, should ignore that?

If MetaMask decided to support ETC by default,, we should not tweet this?

What if an ETC ETF was launched by Greyscale?

Perhaps a compromise would be that this account is not used for small projects, but only big projects such as the examples given?

[ghost]

Projects from small lesser known project must be linked to via the website, which includes a disclaimer, must include a disclaimer within the tweet.

None of these are small projects. Exceptions to larger known projects seems reasonable to retweet with text.

[IstoraMandiri]

@w1g0 cool, let's update that then.

"Large" should would be those projects that have been around for at least 2 years and likely to be known about by most people following ETC. ?

[ghost]

Line 57 "Tether-ETC" maybe better to put "ETC/Tether"
it's very unlikely that Binance will use ETC as denominator ^^

[IstoraMandiri]

By Tether-ETC I meant a version of Tether deployed to ETC.

[ghost]

(e.g. Binance listing TetherETC/ETC pair, ...

(e.g. Binance listing USDT Tether tokens on the ETC blockchain, ...

[ghost]

Still not in favor of the crediting system mentioned in line 70

[TheCrowbill]

There are several minor usage and syntax errors throughout the new text.

Instead of listing them all here individually, may I edit the file directly?

[IstoraMandiri]

There are several minor usage and syntax errors throughout the new text.

Instead of listing them all here individually, may I edit the file directly?

Yes, please do!

[TheCrowbill]

There are several minor usage and syntax errors throughout the new text.
Instead of listing them all here individually, may I edit the file directly?

Yes, please do!

Done.

[IstoraMandiri]

Awesome, thank you @TheCrowbill !

[justjinn]

• Very well written.

• Under new project announcements, may want to add a line or something to minimize scam potential (how will the scam-o-meter be gauged).

• Also may want to add something about new nft project announcements (remembering the time when ETC NFTs started to populate and eth_classic was getting heat for not promoting all NFTs).

Thinking out loud.
💚

[TheCrowbill]

IMO, this is ready to merge and any changes needed going forward can be done from there.

[IstoraMandiri]

IMO, this is ready to merge and any changes needed going forward can be done from there.

Agree, please help merge this @ethereumclassic/tweeters .

[IstoraMandiri]

@TheCrowbill please could you undo the removal third parties?

@w1g0 mentioned above that it's reasonable for large projects such as those in the examples.

At least, please lets discuss this further updates in this thread.

[TheCrowbill]

Yes.

If resolved, why are the requested changes still blocking merge?

[TheCrowbill]

Third Party Projects section has been replaced without alteration.

[TheCrowbill]

AFAIK, this is ready for merge.

[IstoraMandiri]

Thanks @TheCrowbill, and yep, just need one more approval.

Removed small projects