I don't quite follow you. There is a bug, I can't set more than two choices. Also, the limit is not about the number of questions but about the number of vote one can cast. That would definitely help filtering questions and see which are the most wanted. 10 is an arbitrary house. Could be 5 or 20 for all I know.

Questions about fish, questions about everything, questions of string - need has more than 10 questions for testing limits to ten. Still think it should be higher than 10. Could just use numbers or even single letters - doesn't matter what they are, it's testing. Re-reading your addendum, Server side limits - gah. Can still use a single option? Thusly gain a number of interests per question. Thinking further, I've seen polls with more than two options...

Naw, you don't need to edit existing posts, you can simply make another. Anyone can do that. It'd be tidier refactoring existant, ideally the original should be retained in it's original form, there should be no requirement to edit it - the entire premise is slightly shady - but the end result is about the same as if you copy and paste the relevant parts from all the posts in a thread of all the "me too" and other slightly different variations of a question into a single concise question, or have to spin through the entire subforum picking out all the relevent parts to that question and compile into a single post. Ofc, one is easier. All mod or higher privs are required for really is removing content that didn't want to be there anyway, and removal of the lot for archiving as the window expires. Sure once there's colaborational tools on the go then collectively the effort of compiling the mess into a tangible submission will be significantly more cohesive, but it's possible to work iwth what we've got to a lesser or greater extent.

Well, you want the community to help. But I believe that's not possible with the current tools at our disposal. If we had a dedicated tool, then why not. But we'll be using the forum, and therefore people must be granted extra permissions to edit posts and such. With the current status of the forum, I believe the extra work from this proposal will fall into the hands of C.A.

Maybe I did miss number three - my bad. 1. No misunderstanding - The alias you've used is the same as here. By virtue of this it's referencable should they desire, they can find out more about you. Quite why this would adjust the merits of the proposal is a mystery and a highly concerning detail. Anyone else's name is largely irrelevant. 2. I personally implied little, specifically mentioning the "problematic" features can be removed or adjusted in the proposal, Personally like yourself I didn't see anything particularly wrong with the submission and with the fact that English likely isn't the primary language for 90%+ also think it's an odd requirement, and something that will lend unjust bias against those with lesser grasp. 3. "Promotion" is really the wrong word, it'd only be to the scope of the purpose and as such represent a chore. You'd start sensibly with the likes of yourself and Leomarquie who are already "known" and have interest in this precise facet. I assume you'd be willing to tend such an area. Moving invalid posts will be a minor activity - especially after a few runs the majority of the work will be removing repeats etc. This can be minimised in effort by using tools, it's easier to take the input logs and use them, but it's possible otherwise to make it a more effective process. Between you, you should be able to get a post count up - it's quite possible to automate this also. Things like collation of all the replies to a thread into a single concise question can be by the larger community working in concert. Then between you this could be compiled into an "official question list" ordered by popularity and if required the larger community can begin on translational work to make this into the required language - similar for response. After a couple of rounds of this it should start becomming clear who would be sensible to delegate further. Ofc, further delegation occurs via current in-place procedures, just candidates are nominated by existing "staff" and thusly should be assured to be looked at rapidly. 4. Not as much work as it sounds, answering things that can be otherwise answered or redirected to a more appropriate venue can be largely a community afffair, with the mods just taking care of the actual removal/redirection when they have spare time. 5. Additional moderator wasn't an essential, just if needs must - then needs must. It's not an impossible thing to encompass. As for dealing with all the questions, one maybe two hours work at best for a single person - a community effort could have it done in mins. 6. I disagree, the community can take the bulk of this workload, The least we ask of "official" resources, the more chance there is of acceptance. Volunteers for this should not be difficult to locate.

It'd be more sensible with PCKS-11 or X.509. Users should be able to play with X.509 right now. Anyone can type in a number, and they are a little predictable. Nothing digital is "absolutely safe" - especially if I have physical access. It's just time. However, it's possible to layer up sufficiently to give a measure of safety that is abnormally difficult, almost impossible, to bypass. Remotely. How would this "quantum verification system" actually work? How do you propose to get "quantum hardware" into the hands of every citizen in order that this system could actually be usable?

No, it just true. It's defintitely just a waste of cycles, as there's no tangible benefit from the output. You not caring about this, or any other problem you'd be likely to introduce in the effort is more than obvious. You can do far more with far less. To be able to utilise the public/private ID then it's checkable. As it's written into the blockchain, which is publicly hosted, it's leaked to everyone and anyone that wants to pick back the blockchain. It's easier to just not make the correlation than to try and make it harder to spot. Only one of those is assured to work. Blockchain poisioning, AFAIK, is always possible if you hold the larger number of nodes. Which is trivial, least of all to the well funded. Compare this to a secure system. A secure system would only have one copy, and it'd not be accessible externally. It'd only possibly be interfaced with the software that was designed to interface with it, and it would only be delivered to the end user for execution when they need to access it. I'm not making strong assumptions, I'm stating facts. The facts I've learned by not taking the time to study this first.

@all German Asgardians: I was so impertinent to add a comment to the German part of the document "Official name for Asgardians for each language" as it could get really crowded in this thread. I put my suggestion in the comment. Maybe we should try to collect some versions and call for a vote as there is no German subforum yet ? And maybe not limited to translators alone. Though nothing would stop us to change it later on, if needed.

I have chosen this translation, because it fits our languages natural spelling. See for example Bulgaria: Country name Bulgarien Male: bulgare, female: bulgarin Same with Romania and many others

Luckily I figured out that I can just copy and paste the entire list at once. I was afraid I would have to paste them one at a time. That was why I was saying it would take too long. Thank you for the feedback and ideas btw. It has been helpful. As for needing a hand, you must get through the steps to become a moderator first but then after that we can certainly talk about it. Thanks again, Christina Cole

Need a hand? If you create a folder in the Google Doc of Asgardia and put me administrator of this folder, I could invite the translators myself (read/write access). *(given a list of emails to be added)* If you don't have the emails *(and I guess you don't)* then I would open a new thread and ask the translators for their personal email, and add them regularly. *(then the posts with the emails on the forum should be deleted for privacy reasons, but this sub-forum is only accessible to translators, so I guess it's safe to assume it's fine if they are there for a couple days)* If that's okay for you, I hope it can help a bit getting organised quickly.

2. If I have time I will. I'm also planning on lists of who translates into what language so people can interact better with each other. That will come when the rate of applications slows down. 3. Crap. Meant to change that. Thank you for pointing it out. 4. I do understand your point. We actually use Google Docs a lot internally for the reasons you've stated here and elsewhere. The issue is I don't have the time right now to create a special folder and allow over 70 people access with their emails. This may come in time. Thanks, Christina Cole

Thanks **@BohZao**. Well, such API must be built by the official staff developers first, then we (as non-staff Asgardians) will be able to use it and build tooling for other Asguardians. But until such API is done, nothing can be done on our side, we simply don't have access to the DB (and shouldn't) where all Asguardians data are stored. So, this topic is about discussing this and see what should be do about it, which data are considered private, which ones public and so on. Or maybe they're already buidling one and we don't know about it yet.

Vadorequest gretings fellow asgardian, well i really liked the idea (and i think that its possible , since there a lot of good programers here in the forum). well lets wait to see if some of our programers can do something about it and if the Adm can use your ideas in the forum

Indeed, you're right. The CE doesn't allow all the things the Enterprise Edition do. See https://about.gitlab.com/products/#compare-options But AFAIK the link your provided only allows to setup Git itself, not any GUI like Gitlab or Github, meaning nothing like pull request and such. (I may be wrong about that, but to me the Git client is simply the CLI we got on our computer to talk to the CLI on the server, without the handful of features Github provides)

Granted, I'm not entirely conversant on the differences, but I was to understand gitlab-CE was a "cutdown" version missing "features" ? Unless I've grabbed the wrong thing in my haste, I was thinking that link I'd provided is the "full on git" Either way, they both open source and we can modify to suit. Republishing our source shouldn't be a problem as we have founding principles of freedom of knowledge. I'm not entirely fussed what's used, as long as it can do the job.