From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1UFU7D-00041L-Io
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:39:59 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.217.173 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.217.173; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-lb0-f173.google.com; 
Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com ([209.85.217.173])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1UFU79-0004Gb-JH
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:39:59 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id gf7so249626lbb.32
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.125.239 with SMTP id mt15mr14943562lab.26.1363113588807; 
	Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.96.164 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSZfsAbfWqst+DVjKpaJ5dh7u934rp4p=AE8pbni_VSiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <513ED35A.8080203@gmail.com> <201303121210.34515.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CALf2ePwae8Y0KxYqcZxEk_KZjUcQN=jaAp=QWa20QeZtJU7UAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSZfsAbfWqst+DVjKpaJ5dh7u934rp4p=AE8pbni_VSiw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:39:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQVLb1L=LZvYz_rf7Auim_oKRmVp+6NC+5AFjyD9NQe5A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UFU79-0004Gb-JH
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Some PR preparation
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:39:59 -0000

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Peter Vessenes <peter@coinlab.com> wrote:
>> Can some enterprising soul determine if there were any double-spend attempts?
>> I'm assuming no, and if that's the case, we should talk about that publicly.
[snip]
> I agree it would be good to confirm no one was ripped off, even though
> we can't say there weren't any attempts.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152348.msg1616747#msg1616747