.merge- #1195

Removed

Seems like they removed the description. I think some people would still want to move subreddit. Let’s discuss in the next community meeting?

selsta: that PR should stay in the merge queue. The admin put that description up again after it was removed by one of the mods. I highly doubt that he went back on his steps and decided to remove it. It's not just about that phrase being up or not. I'm adding it again, the core team will decide if should be merged or not, but for now there is no reson to remove it.

.merge+ #1195

Added

.merge+ #1177 #1196 #1194

...

.merges

They talked in modmail afterwards and I think he removed it.

I don't think that makes any difference. That's just the last one of many issues with that admin. Something like this can happen the same. We shouldn't just readdit because the admin was basically forced to remove the phrase

let's remember that the subreddit was massively reported

binaryfate snipa what do you think about it?

I'm staying out of it for the most part, because, as I noted, I don't see as much of an issue due to my upbringing/history. I don't know the past with this particular admin, though I'd lean towards, in general, if the admin isn't willing to work with the community, then to consider a replacement, so there's a smooth-ish transition, as the community has a moderately large following, rather than what will seem, from the outside, as

an odd removal of what was originally a canonitial source.

I don't think it's easy thing to replace a reddit admin, would be better to just link to another subreddit. I personally think it's crazy that we are still discussing if we should link to that subreddit after all the present and pass troubles with that admin, especially after he pull up something as disgusting as putting a nazi phrase and, much worse, refused to take it down. Absurd.

I would have suggested to move to a new subreddit and link to the new subreddit. But we can also do it in 2 commits I guess.

Any word from the gentleman who reached out to reddit about potentially replacing him? Also, I'm not arguing for the removal, I'm mostly saying that there should be a transiton plan.

Errr, arguing against*

Sorry, been dealing with a DB mis-sync on one of my production envs, because UI rolled out before server did. So been a hint distracted.

I think was important to take an immediate stance about the episode. I agree about the transition plan, there will be a meeting in few days where we can take an "official" direction, but in the meantime i think it's very important that Monero/Core Team/we make clear that we don't want anything to do with such individual and his actions.

i agree would be better to just replace the admin,so to not lose an active community, but i honestly don't know how doable that is

selsta: could you also give a quick review to 1186 it's the base of 1194, which you already reviewed ;)

forgot a dot there.

will do when I’m back from work

thanks!

The invitiation is for everybody else in this room. 1186 it's quick stuff, just 6 new merchants

3 other PR need reviews:

1191: add note about removal of long payment ids in the moneropedia voice

1180: just make the rss feed use variables for absolutes links (in prep for the onion service)

1174: update all languages with the missing strings. This one is a bit more annoying to review, but can be easily done by building the PR and noticing how all the warnings (or most of them) disappeared

.merge+ #1186

bot ded

Poor bot. :(

ErCiccione[m]: sorry for the delay on my MR for adding the paper title/abstract

Have been delayed running some new data

Nothing to be sorry about. No worries.

.merges

.merge+ #1186

Added

MR 1197 is still WIP since some language files appear to be missing MRL-11 translation strings

I'll add them where missing

There will also be an update to the CLSAG abstract... should I include that in the same MR, or do a separate one?

^ ErCiccione[m] etc.

sarang: i already PRd the missing strings in 1174. only issue is that you will have to rebase after that one is merged

about the update, yeah, better another commit

Another commit in the same MR, or a separate MR?

another commit in the same PR should be fine, just change the title maybe

righto

but also another PR based on 1197 is ok (so you don't have to rebase it)

at the end is whatever luigi prefers

I can either rebase or be lazy and nix the MR, fetch/merge and branch again instead :)

either of the two is fine, but i would go for the lazy way :)

which is not that lazy actually, would avoid you an annoying rebase

righto

depends when suraeNoether gives the go-ahead for the CLSAG update

No rush, i'm going to bed now. Good night!

see ya

side note: would be cool to have these papers published on getmonero first instead of third parties. For a "pr" reason mostly, but i understand our process of reviewing + merge + update getmonero is slower.

I mean, we could

I don't like the idea of not having a canonical version though

There's no license restriction on IACR preprints

yeah i understand. Maybe we could publish at the same time, as much as possible at least

I figured if we're going to put up an IACR version for broad distribution, that could be considered canonical

If there's an idea for a good workflow for this, I'm open to hear it

But not everything we post is suitable for IACR due to scope etc.

Bigger stuff certainly is, like CLSAG or DLSAG or Triptych

No ideas for now, will sleep on it. We could definitely have a better and categorized research lab page tho. Which would give us more possibilities, instead of the general "Monero Research Lab Papers".

dunno. sleepy sleepy. Tomorrow is another day

We could also simply post MRL-header versions of the IACR stuff if desired

I figured the simplicity of single versions could reduce confusion and simplify changes