+1
FWIW to the removal of the non-fiat term.
p.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:43 PM, David Ezell <David_E3@verifone.com> wrote:
> +1
> Thank you
>
> *Ars longa, vita brevis...*
>
> On Sep 9, 2014, at 8:29 AM, "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Manu, Joseph, All
>
> Given that there seems to be a consensus on removing non-fiat. I'm happy
> to proceed. The easiest, at a first glance, is to just remove the term and
> not open another can of worms by adding a new term. I believe that the idea
> is very well conveyed and I feel we don't need to go further.
> I implemented this change (removing the problematic term).
> cheers
> Steph
>
> Le 09/09/2014 03:28, Manu Sporny a écrit :
>
> On 09/01/2014 12:30 PM, Joseph Potvin wrote:
>
> RE: Doesn’t fiat imply government?
>
>
> If what's intended in that section of the Charter is to say
>
> "stateless currencies", then some variant of this phrase would be
>
> better. But would "Berkshares" that (I think) involve a regional
>
> government and some municipalites in Massachussetts be inside our
>
> outside that concept? http://www.berkshares.org/community_industry
>
>
> +1 to removing non-fiat.
>
>
> Perhaps changing it to "private currencies"?
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_currency
>
>
> -- manu
>
>
>
> --
> Stephane Boyera stephane@w3.org
> W3C +33 (0) 6 73 84 87 27
> BP 93
> F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
> France
>
> ------------------------------
> This electronic message, including attachments, is intended only for the
> use of the individual or company named above or to which it is addressed.
> The information contained in this message shall be considered confidential
> and proprietary, and may include confidential work product. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please be aware that any unauthorized use,
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> sender by replying to this message and deleting this email immediately.
>