arrenv

> @area @arrenv can this be implemented through some type of expiration window? e.g. after 7 days if the motion is not approved, it is automatically cancelled? As the only...

> I would suggest doing it as the only option, where if it doesn't pass in the window it automatically fails. I suspect that will be much easier to implement...

> @arrenv as I start to work through this, one idea I had would be to introduce a "cooldown window" after the applicant cancels their application and before their stake...

> > I don't feel it is necessary to store the application details on chain in order for a motion to be able to update details. > > Can you...

I'm not 100% sure how it will be implemented from a technical standpoint, but I am assuming it could be stored in IPFS until the application details are ready to...

> As an update, my thought in approaching this has been to develop a more generic `UxGate` extension which can be used to implement staking to allow access to various...

> @arrenv when slashing a stake, would you like to be able to decide whether or not to remove reputation, as well as the stake? I'm thinking of a logic...

To make it clear, this is what we lose from the simplified version: - There would be no reputation penalty on claiming (although, offset by public claiming function and multicall)...

> @arrenv @area take a look and let me know what you think. I tried to provide functionality to support both the centralized and decentralized use cases. > > @arrenv...

@kronosapiens What would be the downside of them cancelling it themselves straight away? What impact would have have on the Colony as a bad actor? Not saying we shouldn't have...