Standardised Formatting for Motions

[woolly_sammoth]

eg. sending a PM with the following text

motion hash this is my motion

provides the following motion:

Motion RIPEMD160 hash: 886c36dd00ebdf8f87812d141ba941e053c21830

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash starts with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

this is my motion

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash ends with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

Verify. Use everything between and including the <motionhash></motionhash> tags.

By clicking the verify link above and pasting everything between and including the <motionhash. tags into http://hash.online-convert.com/ripemd160-generator, I got the hash:
886c36dd00ebdf8f87812d141ba941e053c21830

[Cybnate]

Thanks @wooly_sammoth This is a huge step ahead as verifying motions have been very complicated for many including myself. Ideally I like to see the forum software verifying motions itself. E.g. by just showing a green tick alongside the hash in the OP or a red cross when it is not validated against the proposed text. But I might be over asking.

[cryptog]

very nice job.

[cryptog]

Motion RIPEMD160 hash: fb1112655ad32255ff5a84210f0a89e6cde3b974

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash starts with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

cryptog motion

=##=##=##=##=##=## Motion hash ends with this line ##=##=##=##=##=##=

Example.

[cryptog]

@assistant verify

[assistant]

Hi @cryptog

Here are the verification results of all the motion and custodian hashes I could find in this thread:

I found the following hashes:
2 Motion | 0 Custodial

motion hash
Original Hash : fb1112655ad32255ff5a84210f0a89e6cde3b974
Calculated Hash : fb1112655ad32255ff5a84210f0a89e6cde3b974
The hash is good.

motion hash
Original Hash : 886c36dd00ebdf8f87812d141ba941e053c21830
Calculated Hash : d2c59ef3af54c4ae9ee5d2a9741b49d05dd7e260
The hash has changed indicating a change to the text.

[desrever]

Excellent job!

Assistant will scan the entire thread for any motions and re-calculate the hash on each.

I am not sure I understand this part fully. How does the bot knows there was a motion in the thread? html tags? What is considered the original hash?

So, what is the use case for a shareholder that wants to promote a motion, click verify, copy everything including < motionhash ></ motionhash> , and open a new thread with it?

[desrever]

ps : @assistant tip 2 @woolly_sammoth

[woolly_sammoth]

Good questions.
The verify scan the thread for any post which contains the hidden html tags that denote a motion or custodial proposal. It expects each to be produced by the private message command to Assistant and so each to contain it’s own unique hash. I did it this way as I have seen several threads where the motion is tweaked and posted again with a new hash. If it is felt that this is unnecessary I can change it to just pull the first post of a thread and check that.

the easiest way for a shareholder to promote a motion in another post would be to use the
assistant motion vote [hash]
command as that will pull in most of the detail of the motion and link to the original post.

[desrever]

the easiest way for a shareholder to promote a motion

Oh, my bad, I meant promote=propose. Do shareholders need to create a new topic and copy the raw text showed in the “verify” page?

[woolly_sammoth]

no problem.
Yeah, that’s how I saw it working.

1. Shareholder wishes to propose a motion.
2. Shareholder composes motion away from site.
3. Shareholder sends Pm to Assistant motion hash [momotion text]
4. Shareholder clicks on ‘verify’ link in the reply from Assistant and copies the entire thing.
5. Shareholder starts new topic and pastes the copied text into the post. They can then add any other text they want but that won’t be included in the hash

The instruction next to the verify link, to copy everything including the tags in instruction for if you want to independently verify the hash with a tool that isn’t Assistant bot.
When calculating the hash, assistant uses the raw text contained by the tags. By copying just that portion of the raw text, any other tool that calculates RIPEMD160 hashes should return the same value.

[desrever]

Got it.

When is polished up and verified then must go to the documentation

[mhps]

If I send in this (a blank line between paragraphs) to assistant

foo
   
bar

to get motion hash I get this back

foo


bar

There is one extra blank line added.
The “verify” text uses <p>foo</p><br><p>bar</p> which adds the extra new line.

if i send this

foo
bar

I get

foo
bar

How can I have exactly blank line ?

[creon]

you can just write
html

<p>you can just write <br>html</p>

[mhps]

Yes I can but I thought there is a better way that all needed to be done is copy and paste?

[creon]

I don’t think so, why are you so picky with the newlines? I think discourse will always make a paragraph out of the line when you just hit enter. The assistant bot could perform some postprocessing to avoid this, but does it look so terrible with the additional line spacing?

[woolly_sammoth]

I can certainly take a look when I next do some maintenance on Assistant. As @creon says, it would need to do some postprocessing before calculating the hash but it should be doable. It’s not going to be for a while yet though I’m afraid.

[mhps]

does it look so terrible with the additional line spacing?

I think so

it would need to do some postprocessing before calculating the hash

I thought all it needed is having every enter translated to a <br> and skip all the <p></p>?

[woolly_sammoth]

Looking at the code it seems I was replacing line breaks (\n) with html breaks (<br />). I’ve switched to replace them with blank strings instead.
that new code is now running, would you like to give it another go?

[mhps]

Thanks @wolly_sammoth for looking into this.

Now the blank line case is solved. But in the second case shown above, i.e. if i send this (press enter then start new paragraph with no blank line)

foo
bar

I get

foobar

If you don’t have time to look into this now I can just do with html by hand as creon suggested.